Having recently watched The Patent Scam, I wish more companies would follow suit here and exit EDOT, maybe then people would wake up and demand that these corrupt judges are removed from the bench!
edit: correction made per child comment.
edit: correction made per child comment.
Fix the easy problems first, then fix the hard ones.
I'm not an expert in this stuff but as far as I can tell the USA is unique in allowing juries to hear this sort of trial, even among countries with a right to jury in a criminal trial.
1. E.g. the Samsung skating rink in front of the Marshall Texas courthouse
Amendment 7 - Rights in Civil Cases In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States than according to the rules of the common law.
The degree and direction of corruption within a judge bear a striking resemblance to the president who appoints them.
I understand that people don't like either "Barack", or "Donald", and others before them, especially calling them by their first name as if they are friends or cousins. But just for fun, let's see if anyone from Belgium, UK, Greece, Spain, etc can name 5 top judges. I, for one, cannot :)
Sidenote: I'm not a US citizen, nor live in the USA.
To me, this is an amazing aspect of the American justice system. Nine individuals, chosen over a broad range of years, are the last bastion of hope in keeping the current politics du jour from running amok. Nine individuals who were most likely all not chosen by the same person, have multitudinous alignments and bring their various perspectives to the table. When they come together in agreement, it is undoubtedly just given their diversty over the decades.
Or at least in theory.
(Curiously, the House of Lords was the top court in the UK before the Supreme Court was created recently)
Britain has a supreme court, but I couldn't name any of the judges. They don't tend to make particularly controversial decisions, nor are they divided along partisan lines. I vaguely recall The Daily Mail describing some high court judges as "enemies of the people" due to some sort of Brexit-related shenanigans, but it all blew over within a couple of days; the overwhelming consensus was that the headline was crass and slanderous. Other than that, I don't recall the last time the judiciary were particularly newsworthy.
I wonder how many people can name Norman Borlaug and what he did vs Adolf Hitler and what he did.