36

The other answers indicate that Trump has appointed an unusually large number of judges, but they don't quite get to how Trump was able to nominate so many more judges than previous presidents. Vox: What Trump has done to the courts, explained One reason is that the Senate under the final two years of Obama's term was controlled by Republicans, and under ...


32

The United Kingdom has 3 legal jurisdictions: England and Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland. Citizens are entitled to bring cases in their own jurisdiction, or any other by mutual agreement (particularly for civil cases). In fact, independent cases are being heard in all 3 jurisdictions. There is a single UK-wide Supreme Court which acts as the final ...


31

There's a key difference: In the Czech Republic, judges are appointed for life and cannot be revoked. Once appointed they can go rabid against the Executive and Legislative branches of government if the situation calls it. (EU countries all have a similarly independent Judiciary branch, whereby Judges cannot readily be dismissed nor can they have their ...


31

Federal grand jury testimony is kept secret due to grand juries operating under far less strict legal standards and proceedings than a typical jury trial, as their primary duty is not to convict an individual but to grant authority to the US Attorney General to pursue charges against an individual, as per the Fifth Amendment: No person shall be held to ...


30

EDIT: corrected errors, added historical references and quotes from order. Donnelly's order (https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3437021/Darweesh-v-Trump-Order-on-Emergency-Motion-for.pdf) is an "Emergency Motion for Stay of Removal". Like any court order, it can only be reversed by a higher court, not by another district court. The order only ...


27

What does it mean that North Carolina's maps were thrown out but new ones weren't ordered drawn? It means that until the legislature redraws the Congressional districts to satisfy the court's requirements, there will be delays in the 2020 elections for Congressional seats. This is a rather detailed article from the local newspaper, The News & Observer, ...


25

Yes it is unusual. Per this Vox article Trump has appointed 48 courts of appeal judges. Here is a comparison with other recent presidents at a similar point in their presidencies and their total number of appointments in parentheses: Trump: 48 Obama: 24 (55) Bush : 30 (62) Clinton: 27 (66) Bush Sr.: 31 (42) Reagan: 23 (83) ...


23

From the sheer size of that list, it wasn't drawn up from scratch in response to the attempted coup but long before. It's impossible to say if all of them have ties to political opponents of Erdogan or if they were simply marked "uncertain loyalty", but it would be astonishing if all those judges were somehow involved in such a small, clumsy and ...


21

I've heard a DA can choose to prosecute or not to prosecute people for virtually any reasons. The concept is called prosecutorial discretion. It is the authority of the district attorney for each district (and ultimately their attorney general) to choose whether or not to press charges in a case, offer a plea bargain or other alternate sentencing ...


17

The Westminster parliament is the parliament of the United Kingdom. Scotland is part of the United Kingdom. (The parliament of Scotland has authority over certain "devolved" matters only.) Any act of the Westminster parliament or of the UK government affecting Scotland must be lawful under the law of Scotland. This gives Scotland's courts jurisdiction ...


15

The judiciary is in charge of interpreting the law while the executive branch, through the Ministry of Justice, Justice Department, etc., is in charge of enforcing the law. The judiciary is mainly comprised of courts and the functions needed to operate them and does not investigate activities leading to litigation or litigate cases before the courts. For ...


14

This argument is the other way round. The UK courts pride themselves on being as apolitical as possible. Because the government has been frustrated in its illegal course of action, they are proposing to pack the court with loyalists in order in revenge. They are proposing to make the court as explicitly political as the US system. An example of a similar ...


13

As there are few government data on the subject of police complaints, it is hard to come by a definite answer. However, FiveThiryEight.com examined several studies which found that around 40% of complaints against police officers resulted in legal action, and of those complaints that did result in legal action, 33% resulted in a conviction and 12% in an ...


13

Grand juries are used to determine if there is enough evidence to bring a case to trial. Even if they decide there is enough evidence to bring a case to trial, the State may not be able to prove that the accused committed a crime. We all (well, at least most people) agree that if a person is not found guilty then the State shouldn't punish them. If the ...


12

A better comparison rather than making estimates about retirements would be looking at how many judges recent presidents appointed. According to wikipedia this seems to be 347 for Obama, and 335 for Bush. The letter you're referencing is dated at 12/07/19, so we can say it's 170 judges over 2.91 years, compared to 347 or 335 over 8 years. This would be 58....


11

According to this answer, only Congress and the Supreme Court can overturn an Executive Order reads answer OK, that's actually a moderately oversimplified and confused answer. The Supreme Court's authority is derived from Article Three of the Constitution (capitalization in original): The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one ...


11

This ruling is a preliminary injunction, not a final ruling on the case. In other words, the judges' ruling prevents North Carolina from using the maps to hold elections, but is not a ruling throwing them out (which cannot happen without a trial). From AP news The panel of three Superior Court judges issued a preliminary injunction preventing elections ...


10

Turkey has seen a rapid political change in the last decade, it has transitioned from a system where secularism was constitutionally mandated in which the current government would not have been allowed to govern. The military used to have the right to intervene in the political system. In 1997, the military removed the Turkish government from power, but ...


10

Those released by the United States as part of the Exchange between Iran and the United States are Nader Modanlo, Bahram Mechanic, Khosrow Afghahi, Tooraj Faridi, Arash Ghahreman, Nima Golestaneh and Ali Saboonchi. (NY Times) All of these prisoners had broken United States Law and not Iranian Law so, even if an extradition treaty between the US and Iran ...


10

The court has no power over Parliament. The principle of "Parliamentary Privilege" is well established, and there have be a number of high profile cases in which Judges have ruled that they can take no action against some alleged wrong (such a libel or breaking an injunction) because the wrong occurred in Parliament. Moreover there is no Judicial review of ...


10

Is the Court really suggesting that the entirety of Congress has to agree that a basic and black-and-white crime like Emoluments occurred before anything can be done about it? If not, who does have standing? Not the entirety. A majority of either house of Congress could pass a resolution authorizing a suit; but it must be the institution and not its members....


9

Scottish people elect representatives to both Westminster and Holyrood. There's news about the group who chose to go to a Scottish court, rather than those who went to an English court, as they were the first to be heard, because the English court wasn't hearing cases that week.


8

Congress cannot delegate statutory rewriting power to the Courts in order that they can make the statute Constitutional. In Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress could not delegate the power to prohibit certain excessive oil shipments to the president. In this decision, Chief Justice Hughes wrote: The Constitution provides ...


8

All right, I'll bite: see Retrospective laws breach separation of powers. Summary A bill of attainder is an obvious breach of the separation of powers. A retrospective law creating criminal liability is tantamount to a bill of attainder. Furthermore, because a judicial finding of law is retrospective to the last relevant legislative change, a legislative ...


8

Stopping a judge The only ways to stop the nomination are for the Senate to vote against him or the president to withdraw the nomination. The only way to remove a federal judge is an impeachment. That requires a majority vote in the House of Representatives, a trial in the Senate, and at least two thirds of the Senate to vote against the judge. So as ...


8

Can a President nominate a US Supreme Court Justice in anticipation of a sitting Justice's demise? First, Supreme Court Justices can only be removed by Death, Impeachment & Removal, or by Resigning. Therefore, as long as an ill Justice hasn't resigned and hasn't died, he or she is still part of the SCOTUS. There is nothing in the constitution that ...


8

I am not sure whether this is the only reason but versus the end of Obama's tenure about ten percent of federal judgeships were vacant, or about 87. An administration focusing on filling these could easily arrive at the current numbers. I am not sure about the reasons for the vacancies (only a minority appears to be due to Republicans blocking them in the ...


7

Because some people value elections over impartiality. Note that in the federal system, no judge is elected. Judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. In states, judges may be appointed in similar fashion or elected. Appointments have the advantage of greater impartiality but can leave judges out of touch. Also, without a way ...


7

I'm no expert, but based on what I've found, I think your teacher (or textbook) was just oversimplifying the system. This page, from the Washington University in St. Louis's law school, says: After two weeks of oral argument, the Court breaks from that routine to work on writing opinions. To this end, at the end of each oral argument period, the Chief ...


7

The judicial system is declared by the United States constitution, but it isn't defined by it. The judicial system is defined by laws passed over time. Those laws establish the district and circuit (appeals) courts. Only the Supreme Court is actually mentioned by name in Article III of the US constitution: The judicial Power of the United States, ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible