Why do judges in american courts act like they are Gods.?
444597
it would be chaos if everyone could speaks as they liked. it would be interrupted all the time. and in court you need to use the law, not emotion to decide. if people get emotional or start a speech, that goes out the window. the all rise is respect to the judge.
523800
nope, its legislators who make law... judges interpret them
599222
Here's another thing to think about...while some judges CAN be bought, they aren't even the real problem. The philosophy for being a judge is to have no political affiliate, to be fair and impartial, to listen to the merits of each case seperately and as presented. But some judges, especially a couple of new Supreme Court Justices, do not feel the need to represent the law, leaving their political views outside their courtrooms. Worse than one crooked judge in a million, is the zealot who believes it is his or her responsibility to "fix" what he or she believes is wrong in the world - and now has the power to do that! Scary stuff.
402050
Judges is the best example I think.
41619
During the proceedings themselves? That is not possible.  Only a higher court can over rule a court, and that's only if they agree to hear the case in the first place.  Many superior courts will turn cases back claiming juristiction issues, and the Supreme Court rejects cases almost routinely, as few cases rise to the level of a true challenge to current interpretations of the Constitution.
761465
Good question. There are many times that I have felt that we have been under a dictatorship of the judiciary.
619272
do you have evidence of this or have you just experienced one case where you were affected or knew someone affected and are biased by that. Courts are also bound by previous decisions of courts higher than their own which means that some results may seem unfair but are in the big picture more beneficially than harmfull
1125060
OH yeah, it definetly makes me angry that they don't get what they deserve like everyone else does.  (eventhough out idiotic judicial system only gives people like a couple years for the crime).
203050
This is what happend in the United States when an activist Supreme Court treats the Constitution as a "Living Document".\n\nSeveral democrats have been recently quoted as having concerns about Judicial nominees because the courts can "make laws".\n\nThis is not true.  Judges "interpret" law.  \n\nLiberal activist judges "interpret" law like Clinton "interprets" fidelity and integrity.\n\nCongress "makes" law.  Citizens "make" case law.
277500
The judge is attempting to be fair and impartial. Last I checked, the Judge is a member of the same religious sect as Saddam Hussein al-Tikiriti (to use his FULL name). The judge is bound by their jurisprudence which is based upon the Brittish system. Mr. al-Tikriti is being tried by jury.
236252
If a judge renders an opinion on an issue that does not directly relate to the issue before him or her, the opinion on that issue is called dicta. While that opinion is not binding, it could be pursuasive to other judges. Should judges be allowed to express their opinions? Sure.\n\nGenerally, judges can do whatever they want.
691103
Not all laws are Godly laws, and there are corrupt people in all professions. I would say sometimes the people in law enforcement over step their bounds and even to the point of killing someone, but this doesn't mean all people in law enforcement are acting ungodly.
27887
They don't, unless you believe what you see on T.V.  I have been an attorney for 12 years and was a paralegal for 3 years before that.  In my entire career, I have NEVER seen a real judge bang a gavel.
1144732
Impossibility !\n\nThis could be due to some Act of God or due to some circumstantial reasons. \n\nbut if any judge give these kind of order the it would be impossible for him to continue as a judge.\n\n-k-
1084363
A little note on the particulars of lawmaking and judgments (which are NOT the same).  The creation of laws is done by the legislative branch (ie. Congress or Administrative Agencies - whose legitimacy can be debated as well).  The interpretation of laws is done by the Judicial Branch (ie. judges, ultimately the Supreme Court).  \n\nThere are several types of law in the United States, which is followed from the ancestors from England...Common Law, Natural Law, positive Law, Administrative Law, Ordinances, State Law,  and Constitutional Law.  Most people have no idea how these all fit together.  BASICALLY....\n\nWhen an entity (usually a person) appeals a case to the United States Supreme Court, and it is accepted for review by the Court, the parties are arguing points of law, not whether something happened or not.  In reviewing a case, the Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are supposed to use above all else for their considerations the United States Constitution - the SUPREME law of this land.  (This is how if something is found unconstitutional, the case is over becuase it is by nature illegal.)  \n\nThe Constitution however is viewed through the lenses of human eyes that have had experiences and posses hidden motives.  These are what move a Justice to decide one or another.  \n\n(In regards to a precedent....this applies to Common Law only, which is the lowest forms of law in this country.  All that a precedent is, is a way another Justice at some level decided in a particular region.  That is, if an Alabama judge decided a case for a certain reason...other Alabama judges would be expected to find the same decision in similar cases.  This precedent would not at all apply to courts in Colorado or Maine or...any other state.  Precedents are most similar to ordinances - "don't do that because we have realized it causes harm to many.")
782019
Not where I live.  Judge thinks hes god here.  Good to know if any wway any one could complain.  Ill check back on you.
1187703
A very good question!  Actually, that is about it, but local judges are voted into office by the people not assigned by a governor.