MicroWave@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.worldEnglish · 16 hours agoJack Smith’s big new Jan. 6 brief is a major indictment of the Supreme Courtslate.comexternal-linkmessage-square24fedilinkarrow-up1421
arrow-up1421external-linkJack Smith’s big new Jan. 6 brief is a major indictment of the Supreme Courtslate.comMicroWave@lemmy.world to politics @lemmy.worldEnglish · 16 hours agomessage-square24fedilink
minus-squareFedizen@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up4·4 hours agothey should just require a randomly selected jury for any ruling and the justices only job should be deciding what to present to jurors
minus-squareshastaxc@lemm.eelinkfedilinkarrow-up5·3 hours agoI’m not sure I’d like to trust a random jury to determine the interpretation of laws
minus-squareFedizen@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·2 hours agoI can guarantee a randomly selected jury would do a better job than the current court.
minus-squarebarsquid@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·2 hours agoYeah you’d have to buy a dozen RVs instead of just one.
minus-squareFedizen@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·edit-22 hours agoI haven’t heard of a lot of jury tampering trials go well. And usually isnt it more of a mafia style “nice family you got there, would be a shame if something happened to it” situation?
they should just require a randomly selected jury for any ruling and the justices only job should be deciding what to present to jurors
I’m not sure I’d like to trust a random jury to determine the interpretation of laws
I can guarantee a randomly selected jury would do a better job than the current court.
Yeah you’d have to buy a dozen RVs instead of just one.
I haven’t heard of a lot of jury tampering trials go well. And usually isnt it more of a mafia style “nice family you got there, would be a shame if something happened to it” situation?