judges qualifications?
477764
According to the US Constitution there are no requirements to be a US Supreme Court Justice. Article 3 of the US Constitution states "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office." States all vary with some requiring law school and a Bar Association while others require very little. \n\nIn Liberty,\nEric H. Smith\nwww.erichsmith.com
658374
The vast majority of judges were lawyers before they became judges.\n\nThey had to prove themselves for years in a court room as a lawyer before they were appointed or elected as a judge.\n\nOnce a judge they don't have to do as much leg work and research as the lawyers that come into their court. But they must know and understand all aspects of the law, they have to be fair (even if they don't like the defendent or the lawyers) and they have to read tons of legal paperwork.\n\nBeing a judge is hard work that may appear easy to most of us, but we have to remember that the judge had to really prove themselves with years of hard work before they became a judge.
1160964
your comment about the law lords coming up with laws with the help of their friends is complete bull. Law lords are simply the highest level of judge in the UK. They dont proactively make laws. Like the courts below them they must wait for a case to be brought before them, and then decide on the disputed points of law that would be in the best interest of the parties, and society. There is no doubting the intelligence and ability of our law lords. They are among the best in their profession, in the world, let alone in hte country. \n\nAs for a conspiracy in law, well, judges are very hard to remove. The circuit judges and above can only be removed due to infirmary (physically/ mentally unable to do the job) Retirement (age 70 or 80, i forget which) Resignation, and dismissal. Since the only way to dismiss a judge is for parliament to petition his removal (virtually pass a law to remove him) there really is no need for them to 'use the law to cover themselves' And in practice that wouldnt happen anyway. Albeit only one high level judge has EVER been dismissed and one low level (for smuggling drugs in his yacht) Besides, not wanting to amend parts of the law? hell they'll amend it as the public see fit if they want to get elected again. Just to point out how well the law has been used to 'protect' the government in their sleaze allegations. I think the only way for what i think you're suggesting to happen would be for one of the arms of state (montesquieus theory, The legislature, The executive and the judiciary) gains too much power. But then the other arms act as a check and balance to bring them back down to earth.\n\n\nNotyou311- The law lords are the top judges in the UK. The house of lords, whilst being a chamber of parliament, also houses the highest court in the land. They decide on only THE most socially important cases and are bound by no courts (except the European court of Justice but thats debateable). THe only thing stronger than the law coming out of hte house of lords is an act of parliament.\nHotirongirl- Nobody has absolute power. There is always a check and balance to cancel them out.
410513
That's awesome that you want to be become a judge!  \n\nFirst, figure out what classes in high school you HAVE to take and start getting those out of the way.  Then, take a class in government or law.  You could even try out for the Mock Trail or debate team if your school has one.  They usually deal with major political issues.\n\nGood luck.  ;)
514558
Dear Friend,\n\nI THINK you mean judicial precedents.  Judges apply laws to facts.  Ideally, one set of facts should get you the same result no matter which judge you go before.  Also, ideally, you should be able to tell before you go to court what the outcome should be.  If law is reliable and uniformly applied by different judges, all of us can plan our lives accordingly.\n\nSo, judges basically copy each other.  If one judge said that a certain law dictates a certain result under certain circumstances, the next judge to face the same circumstances will try to do the same.  The decision of the prior judge is cited as "precedent," or authority.\n\nIf a really important court, like the United States Supreme Court, makes a precedent, everyone HAS to follow it.  If a lower court judge makes a precedent, other judges may consider it but don't have to.\n\nHope that helps!\n\nYour Friend,\nFrancesois
899475
Judges shouldn't be rewarded seats via their political contributions!\n\nJudgeships should rewarded by their merit, qualifications, and their competence.
636519
go to www.govermentjob.com or go to your local court house and ask the question
657292
Dear Friend,\n\nI can't answer as to the second part of your question, but my experience in the U.S. is that judges HATE mandatory sentencing.  Basically the sentencing rules tied their hands and forced them to impose harsher sentences than the circumstances required.  Always easy to say in the abstract what someone should get, much harder when faced with the concrete, a flesh-and-blood person's life, as judges are.  Recent decision in US says that judges can't be held to mandatory sentencing (e.g., for drugs), but have to view them as guidelines.\n\nYour Friend,\nFrancesois
887259
It depends on what the judge set at the trial.  It could be anywhere from 2-5 years.  You need to find out what time frame the judge gave.
685897
I completed pre-law, however even though I am not an attorney I do work in the legal field.  It seems to me that a lot of attorneys that don't have a booming business, only a few do.  I think it depends on who you know, your connections.  It helps to know judges.
647535
I'm not sure if you can find this information easily (maybe if you call your local Republican or Democratic party headquarters or your local courthouse?).\n\nRegardless, hopefully the Judge hands down his ruling independently based on the evidence and precedent, not his political leanings.
266845
I would examine the records of their major decisions.  Of course, they should have extensive experience with multiple facets of that law, especially Constitutional Law.\n\nI would interview potential candidates personally, one-on-one, if possible, in order to get a general feeling for their character. I would talk to their friends and even try to talk to any enemies they have made (other than in their capacity as a judge).\n\nI would ask three simple questions:\n\nDo they give the spirit of the law equal weight to the letter of the law? Are their decisions consistently on the side of human rights and fairness? Have they had a reasonably clean bill of health, and do they treat their body well? (i.e. do they smoke, eat excessively, neglect to exercise, etc.?)\n\nAnyone who fulfilled those three criteria would be a prime candidate in my book.
1092058
go see a judge he show u one
884008
your talkin about a lot of different factors how much money is involved. some judges will give you a fine and community service if you have a really good lawyer plus good background reports will help. if it is serious your talkin about six months to 5 years depending on the money e.t.c sorry
774721
I hope you enjoy the link to get your results since I don't know what type of judge you're asking for.  I hope this helps you out.
235005
hahaha can I send the judge over too?
1089374
Federal judges use a published guideline to help them determine whether or not a defendant serves time and how much time they will serve.\nIt is fairly complicated but you can try to wade through it and see how close you come to the decision that the Judge will make.