On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 01:07  PM, Erik Reuter wrote:

On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 05:24:09PM -0000, Andrew Crystall wrote:
Yes, Britain's uncodified constitution isn't black and white in the
same way, but it lets judges have far more leyway to clamp down on
the goverment and other organisations when they try to start working
round civil liberties.

And yes, the European courts and the Human Rights act prevent a lot
of what's currently happening in America. You may see us as Big
Brother, but we have more solid lines drawn in the sand than you over
many issues. Ours may have started more to the left than yours, but
they're deeper.
How are judges chosen in Britain? In the U.S., many of them are
appointed by the President. I am becoming increasingly disturbed by
this, because it creates a conflict of interest -- the judges should be
a check on the other branches of government, not appointed because they
have exactly the same views as the appointer.

<snipped>
"Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>       http://www.erikreuter.net/
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Minor nitpick: Federal Judges are *nominated* by the President, but are confirmed by the Senate. Quite a few nominees have been rejected by that body.

john

_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to