Judges decisions.... need help please and thankyou?

ok i know if a judge has an appeal its bad for them

what if the decison is reversed is that good or bad for them

1 Answer

Relevance
  • Randy
    Lv 7
    9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    You’re getting into more than what (I suspect) you intended. Appeals certainly exist. They exist within State court systems, they exist within federal court systems, and they exist between State and federal court systems. The necessity for this and the structure within which it resides was the center of great moment and debate during the Convention for the Constitution. In other words, there was not agreement as to how this was handled and the final system was as much compromise as logical. If you are interested in this segment the appeal process I suggest that you reference the debate in the Committee of the Whole between Madison, and Rutledge concerning the Virginia Plan.

    As to the specifics of your question. Yes, no, it depends. Not much help is it? It depends on the laws applicable to ‘the’ specific case, the type of case, and the acceptability of the evidence at any given level of the appeal process.

    In general, a reversal of a decision with a particular case could mean that the judge (in the original case) interpreted the applicability of law incorrectly. While a single (or even a few) such reversals for a specific judge is not normally meaningful in the judge’s career, a pattern of similar reversals could bring it to the attention of the ruling court and result in a negative chastisement of that judge. However, if a judge is of elected as opposed to an appointed bench, then the voters (the few who actually follow decisions) can not reelect the judge.

    However, it usually isn’t that straight foreword. In certain types of cases the Ninth Circuit Federal Court is typically out of step with the other circuits and is many times reversed under appeal at the United States Supreme Court level, but that doesn’t seem to have negatively impacted the careers of any judging sitting on that particular bench.

    It is more common (but only barely) to see judges within the State Court Systems be chastised for decisions. However, the more common ‘reversal’ (of a type) is new decisions over time. An example is the case of US v. Miller [1939] that ruled that the government could enforce rules on the ownership of guns and in particular the citizen ownership of a sawed off shotgun. Although there was a minority opinion that if evidence had been presented to the court as to the military use of such a gun the government control could not have been enforced. (It was a military arm as used in WWI).

    The recent cases of Washington DC v. Helmer and Chicago v. McDonald have by and largely overturned that 1939 decision. It is quite difficult to make general comments such as you are seeking.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.