Harsher Measures in Regards to Judicial Ethics

Firestone Discussion
22

well they still had the right to say the n word on facebook, its just that they got punished to do so because of their department guidelines

and limiting the speech of government officials (regardless of their position in neutrality) would set a dangerous precedent in the legislative capacity. other people can then in turn create laws that could technically make it so the citizens can’t criticize the government, or the department employees can’t criticize the incompetent administration that they’re employed under

23

Unconstitutional

Cybervict v SCSO says they can’t if it’s not respectful.

3 Likes
24

concur with your last comment

25

still find it redundant to limit ajscs to be “respectful”

proves nothing except that the government hates court officers who like to talk shit

26

danny always coming in clutch… Thank you Danny, very cool!

1 Like
27

To keep judges from, in public, calling the AG a useless retard therefore causing recusals

1 Like
28

well that should just be common sense and should be set through judiciary policies, not through legislative means

29

I fully support this idea, and believe something needed to be done in response to the judicial “power” control in regards to situations like these. There needs to be policies in place, or regulation put forth above them to prevent by all means, any sort of this behavior from them. As a judge, you should yes, by means of common sense, understand that you should be punished for your actions, but some people just don’t seem to understand…

30

Still unconstitutional no matter how you swing it. Sorry, Chief. Regulate it properly if you’re going to regulate it.

31

Myself, the AG, the Chief Justice, and multiple other lawyers say it isn’t. Curiously, the only legal official that disagrees is the one that would inevitably stand the most to lose under this bill: you.

2 Likes
32

The judiciary cannot enforce policy beyond court procedure through appeal. You can’t appeal an off color statement in a public setting, and there is no way for the judiciary to censure or punish judges.

4 Likes
33

whispers on the wind
libel and slanderrrrrrrrrr

in fact i just finished taking a POLSCI final which incorporated these two aspects in the judicial review section of the exam ayyyyyy

1 Like
34

None of these people have reach out to me and gained my legal opinion on it. That’s why the Supreme Court conducts oral arguments prior to ruling on matters. It’s a blatant violation of BOR.I.

35

I mean, if you really wanted to, you could amend BOR.I to include an exemption for judicial ethics but I doubt that is necessary.

36

If only there was a Court of the Judiciary…

37

I told Danny to do that. I’d rather legally have no rights than congress make unconstitutional legislation.

38

Do you agree that congress is able to take the constitution and define ambiguities with legislation (I.e. defining the words “high crimes and misdemeanors” by law)?

39

It depends on how it is done. I don’t have a firm answer for this.

40

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

1 Like