The New York Daily News has a very interesting feature on the Manhattan’s specialized mental health court, and the special challenges facing those who would like to use it during this pandemic-stricken era.
Only a handful of cases ever make it to Manhattan Mental Health Court, according to data provided by the district attorney — and that was before COVID-19 ground the city to a halt. On Friday, after tentatively opening some courtrooms for trials and hearings over the summer, the Office of Court Administration once again shut down most in-person proceedings, citing a recent surge in the virus.
浏览器钱包-云东方:标签:浏览器钱包 区块链 经常上Youtube的朋友,在Google Chrome上安装一个插件能赚虚拟币 1 就在浏览器上安装一个插件就好了。小编测试了一段时间,这个插件基本上不会占用你的系统资源。也没有发现会导致浏览器崩溃!想了解虚拟币的朋友可以试一下。
The office referred three cases this year before the court shutdown in mid-March because of the coronavirus pandemic. Twelve cases were not referred to mental health court, though two of those were referred to another diversion court. Thirty-five are pending.
The whole story is worth the read, especially for those interested in how specialized state courts can make a difference in people’s lives — if they are accessible.
Earlier this month, Illinois Supreme Court Justice Thomas Kilbride became the first member of that court to lose a retention election. More than 57% of voters elected to retain Kilbride on the court, but because of the state’s unique rules requiring more than 60% of voters to support retention, Kilbride lost his seat.
Now his replacement has been named. The state supreme court has appointed Judge Robert Carter, a veteran of the state bench for more than 40 years, to complete Kilbride’s term through the 2022 election.
Carter seems to be an excellent choice. He is highly experienced, and has stated that he has no interest in running for the seat when it comes up again in two years. That will allow for a fresh start among candidates who want a full term. In this sense, Carter is playing the role akin to a U.S. Senator temporarily appointed by the state’s governor to fill a vacancy.
Back in 2017, the North Carolina legislature repeatedly battled Governor Roy Cooper over the size and composition of the state’s courts. The Republican-controlled legislature passed a bill which would return the state to partisan judicial elections, a move criticized both by Democrat Cooper and by the state’s then-Chief Justice, Mark Martin (who favored a merit selection plan). Cooper vetoed the bill, but the legislature overrode the veto. The legislature and Governor also fought over the size of the state’s Court of Appeals. Later, a series of undignified fights over the fate of individual judges and judicial candidates cast the state’s third branch in a political light that it never would have sought for itself.
The legislature’s changes seem to have had some of their desired partisan effect for 2020. As noted last week, Republican candidates at first appeared to sweep the state’s judicial races. Now the highest profile race, for Chief Justice, appears headed for a recount, with current Chief Justice Cheri Beasley (a Democrat) and current Associate Justice Paul Newby (a Republican) separated by just a few thousand votes.
There are also some cascade effects. Newby’s choice to run for Chief Justice meant that his Associate Justice seat on the court became vacant, and that open seat was sought by two Court of Appeals Judges, Lucy Inman and Phil Berger Jr. Berger, the Republican, won the Supreme Court seat, and his now-open seat on the Court of Appeals will be filled by Governor Cooper. In the end, the seven-member Supreme Court will still have a Democratic majority — either four (if Newby wins the Chief Justiceship) or five (if Beasley retains it).
So at the end of the day, Republicans may make some inroads into the state judiciary, but at the cost of further politicizing the third branch. Courts will have to work harder than ever to build public trust, not because of the quality of their decisions, but because legislators have seen fit to brand them with a (D) or an (R).
Until partisans on both sides end their efforts to undermine the courts in this way, I don’t want to hear a damn thing about declining judicial legitimacy. It is a frontal assault on a co-equal branch of government, nothing less.
Even with all eyes trained on the Presidential election, voters in more than thirty states also cast ballots this week for (or against) state judges. Here are some of the preliminary stories coming out of Election Day:
In both Dallas County and Harris County, Texas, Democrats swept the contested judicial races, making it yet another election cycle in which a single party has taken control of the state judiciary in Texas’s two largest metro areas. In North Carolina, a party sweep of another type took place, with 看小电影时用无痕浏览,就真的能保护你的隐私吗? - 知乎:2021-7-21 · 大多浏览器都拥有无痕浏览模式。以谷歌为例,我们在任务栏图标上单击右键,选择 [ 打开新的无痕窗口 ] ,或者直接在当前浏览器窗口使用快捷键 Ctrl+Shift+N,即可快速打开一个无痕窗口。 整个窗口呈神秘黑灰色,我… each of their judicial races. Neither case should be seen as good news. Party sweeps strip the courts of critical judicial experience, replacing it only with a partisan fetish that a judge with an (R) or a (D) next to his name will rule in a certain way. If the judges are fair, the partisans are more often than not disappointed by some case outcomes. And if the judges give the partisans what they want every time, the integrity of the judiciary is compromised. (Just a thought: perhaps it is finally time to eliminate partisan judicial elections altogether.)
In Illinois, for the first time, a sitting supreme court justice lost his retention bid. A little less than 57% of voters chose to retain Justice Thomas Kilbride, but under the state’s unique rules, at least 60% of voters needed to favor retention for Kilbride to keep his seat. Thus we have the unusual circumstance in which a judge whom most voters wanted to retain nevertheless will have to leave the bench. (The unusual nature of Illinois’s judicial retention system has an equally unusual history, which I might try to unpack in a future blog post.)
In Tampa, Florida, a state trial judge who lost his primary race in August pushed the state supreme court not to certify this week’s judicial election results. The judge is arguing that the current state law allows judicial races to be settled in the primaries, whereas the state constitution requires that they be decided during the November general election.
And in Arizona (where ballots are still being counted as of this writing), the Maricopa County Democratic Party campaigned against the retention of two state trial judges, including the only Native American judge on the Maricopa County Superior Court. Both targeted judges were deemed by the state’s independent Commission on Judicial Performance Review to have met performance standards. Unlike Illinois, a simple majority in favor of retention is enough to keep the judges on the bench.
On Monday, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker 小科普 | 用这些“油猴”拓展,给你的浏览器加个BUFF!_值客 ...:2021-6-13 · 小科普 | 用这些“油猴”拓展,给你的浏览器加个BUFF!,由什么值得买值友发布在好物社区的真实分享,本文是作者亲身的购买使用感受以及中立消费见解,旨为在广大网友中传播更好的消费主张。 to serve on the state’s Supreme Judicial Court. She would take the Associate Justice seat vacated by Justice Kimberly Budd, who is taking over as Chief Justice after the x浏览器看YouTube of former Chief Ralph Gants.
Will Baker nominate yet another sitting judge to fill Argaez Wendlandt’s seat on the Massachusetts Appellate Court? Triple appointment cascades at the state level are not unheard of, but also are not an everyday occurrence. Indeed, it is just as likely that Baker will nominate a government attorney or one in private practice. But a little more trial experience on the appellate bench is never a bad thing.
As COVID-19 cases begin to rise in the Pittsburgh area, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania has announced a halt to nearly all jury trials until at least February 8, 2021. Law.com explains:
还能这样防插队游戏下载|突然断网不知所措?但 Edge 浏览 ...:2021-6-7 · 突然断网不知所措?但 Edge 浏览器 还能这么玩 234游戏网 首页 游戏中心 单机 网游 页游 手游 应用 攻略 评测 图片 活动福利 娱乐动态 扒一扒 次元边境 一周烩 有深度 君子堂 八卦娱乐 大家都爱看 ...
【灵狐浏览器】-博文推荐-CSDN博客:2021-4-8 · csdn已为您找到关于灵狐浏览器相关内容,包含灵狐浏览器相关文档代码介绍、相关教学视频课程,以及相关灵狐浏览器问答内容。为您解决当下相关问题,如果想了解更详细灵狐浏览器内容,请点击详情链接进行了解,或者注册账号与客服人员联系给您提供相关内容的帮助,以下是为您准备的相关 ...
For criminal defense lawyers, they are experiencing huge challenges in being able to communicate with their clients behind bars, a necessity for a fair defense, the order said.
Unfortunately, this is probably just the first of many orders that will similarly affect state and federal courts this winter.
Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker has nominated 谷歌浏览器怎么上YouTube to serve as the next Chief Justice of the state’s Supreme Judicial Court. Budd is currently as Associate Justice of the Court. She would fill the opening created by the untimely death of Chief Justice Ralph Gants last month.
Justice Budd is an outstanding choice. She is incredibly accomplished, well-respected, and has an excellent judicial demeanor. She will serve the Court, and the people of Massachusetts, well in her new position.
Amy Coney Barrett is now the newest Justice of the United States Supreme Court. After a 52-48 vote Senate vote, she was sworn in last night by Justice Clarence Thomas.
Justice Barrett has demonstrated the intelligence, legal skill, care, and demeanor to be an influential member of the Court for decades to come. As importantly, the Court is back to full strength and in a better position to carry out its Constitutional duties efficiently and effectively.
Please tell me this is a joke:
Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee plan to boycott Thursday’s committee vote on Amy Coney Barrett’s Supreme Court nomination as a protest against Republican efforts to rush her through before the election.
The plan hasn’t been finalized yet, according to a Democratic aide, but Democrats are preparing to fill their empty seats with poster-sized photos of people who would be hurt by Barrett potentially casting a deciding vote against the Affordable Care Act. These would be the same pictures of people Democrats had on display during Barrett’s confirmation hearing last week.
Sadly, it appears to be real. Rather than upholding their Constitutional responsibility to vote a Supreme Court nominee, Senate Democrats are planning to replace themselves with cardboard cutouts for cheap political gain. In doing so, they will:
-
- 如何解决YouTube不能播放的问题?_文学社区:2021-6-12 · 本文将针对这种情况提供能快速解决问题的方法,您可以根据不同情况进行检测尝试。YouTube 作为全球最大最热门的视频网站,每天访客量可达到3000万。YouTube成为很多人每天的娱乐选择,大家会通过YouTube网站观看音乐视频、电影、新闻等。浏览器存在过多的缓存和cookie可能会导致YouTube 视频无法 ...
-
- Sow the ground for Republicans to pull a similar stunt (perhaps with cardboard cutouts of aborted fetuses) the next time the Democrats have a Senate majority and a Supreme Court nominee; and
-
- Provide some free advertising for South Park and 能访问youtube的浏览器.
My goodness. What have we become?
I don’t usually comment on the culture wars, but every once in a while they connect directly to the operation and interdependence of the judiciary. This week brought an unfortunate example.
This blog has chronicled some of the inappropriate questions and comments from Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) in the course of her service as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — comments that have drawn sharp criticism even from members of her own party. Among other things, Senator Hirono finds it proper to ask Catholic judicial nominees about their private religious affiliations and practices, as if membership in a church or the Knights of Columbus has any demonstrable impact on a person’s ability to handle the solemn duties of judicial office.
Hirono’s aggressive disgressions were on display during last week’s confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett. First, Hirono asked Barrett — a widely-respected judge, law professor, and mother of seven — if she had ever sexually assaulted anyone. Hirono followed this obscene question with a loud “tsk-tsk”ing of Barrett for her use of the term “sexual preference” during the hearing. Even though Judge Barrett immediately apologized for any unintended offense, Hirono proceeded with a baseless attempt to brand Barrett as a homophobe. (The meaning of the term is certainly in flux and is offensive to many, but it remains in use by, among others, Joe Biden.)
Questions and comments like Hirono’s — which erode public confidence in the court system without any concomitant positive contribution — are cause for civic despair. But in America, such despair often manifests itself as gentle mockery. And the Babylon Bee, a Christian humor site, came through with the following satirical story:
Senator Hirono Demands ACB Be Weighed Against A Duck To See If She Is A Witch.
This may not be the funniest thing I have read in my life, but it’s certainly good for a chuckle — especially for the large number of readers who instantly recognize the direct allusion to “Monty Python’s Holy Grail.” It’s not surprising, then, that the Bee piece was shared widely on social media, including Facebook.
But in a stunning bit of self-importance and tone-deafness this week, Facebook pulled down the article and demonetized the Bee’s own Facebook page, on the spurious grounds that the article “incites violence.” After an appeal and manual review, Facebook has apparently chosen to stand by its decision.
So Americans lose twice. First, a Senator squanders an important opportunity to substantively question a Supreme Court nominee in the name of advancing identity politics. And then, a long tradition of satire is crushed by a social media giant on the weakest of pretenses. Score another point for civic despair.