this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
236 points (98.8% liked)

politics

19138 readers
3318 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Smith team then made its most important and aggressive move by noting that when judges have issued clearly erroneous jury instructions that doom prosecutions, “courts have permitted the government to obtain writs of mandamus.”

Even buried in a parenthetical as it is, the word “mandamus” jumps off the page as a threat to seek an extraordinary intervention by the appellate court. Smith has laid down the gauntlet, telling Cannon in no uncertain terms that if she doesn’t move to resolve Trump’s frivolous arguments well ahead of trial, he will bring a writ of mandamus to the 11th Circuit along with a motion to recuse her from the case. Providing this road map of his intentions puts Smith on firm footing to challenge the judge if she continues to dither.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Appreciate the info...it's funny they have a special way to officially say "nah, fuck you, do your job."

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

She probably won't know what means and to stupid to look it up. Or she will ignore it.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Until AI is smart enough to preside over our courtrooms in a purely unbiased fashion (ha!), we’ll be stuck with shitty humans running our shitty legal systems.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

AI would work along the parameters that are set by the biased humans that programmed it, so it would just be another layer of abstraction continuing the same systemic issues.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

Yes obviously, which is why I laughed immediately after saying it.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Even if humans build a computer smarter than we are, the machines will still be a product of human minds.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Of course but the next generation will be of the computer’s minds. Evolution will continue long into the machine age.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Intelligent and moral are too separate things. Henry Kissinger was objectively intelligent He spoke several languages and conducted high level negotiations with world leaders. He also made the decision to bomb civilians in Laos, Cambodia and Vietnam.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I thought we were talking about AI judges. They should be impartial and consider the facts, what has morals got to do with it?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You should read some of Kissinger's writings. He didn't kill all those people because he wanted to be a monster; he had a rational belief that killing millions in Asia would lead to long term peace. He was impartial and considered the facts.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Judges have to interpret the law and apply it. AI executive branch / military would apply to what you’re saying however.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

That question is exactly why we shouldn't try this