Anti Videogame Judge Seeks Re-election In Missouri

nevarre writes, "US District Judge Stephen Limbaugh (yes, he IS related to Rush) along with other local judges will be up for retention vote status this November 7th on the Missouri state ballot. You may remember him from his ruling in 2002 that videogames are not a conveyance for ideas and are therefore not protected as 'free speech' even though he felt that stopping fax spam would violate 'commercial speech' protections under the First Amendment."

Comments

Why do you elect judges in the United States?

[Hamster Lover]

I've never understood why some jurisdictions of the United States elect local judges. What are the prerequisits, such as a law degree, and what is the justification in politicising the judiciary? What are the checks and balances to a judge who simply rules cases strictly on his personal beliefs and not the law?

Anyway, I don't get it and it seems like system that is ripe for abuse.

Federal Judge Seeking Reelection?

[Dausha]

"US District Judge Stephen Limbaugh . . . will be up for retention vote status this November 7th on the Missouri state ballot."

Um, sorry, but 1) Federal judges have life tenure and 2) if they did not have life tenure would not be on a state ballot. Obviously somebody was napping in their Government/Civics class---the poster and the editor who released onto /. Tenured judges are immune to popular opinion and are assumed to be able to make anti-majoritarian decisions like Miranda, Roe, and Fax-Spam. Conversely, elected state judges are more likely to be responsive to their constituents, which tends to be lawyers who fund their war chest.

So, the poster of this attack piece is trying to link the actions of a Federal judge to a state judge? While it appears they are related (Senior and Junior apparently being a dead give away), this is tantamount to punishing the son for the sins of the father. How about we try assessing the individual, elected, state judge for his own actions?