03-01-2021, 11:34 AM
(03-01-2021, 10:16 AM)GMDino Wrote: Why don't we give judges a form of qualified immunity? If they are acting within their training/orders they can be investigated for their actions and it can be determined if they did anything beyond the scope of their job/hadn't been done before (I'm over simplifying it, I know).
But then they can be held responsible if something goes astray but they don't have to worry about it constantly.
Judges already have complete immunity and they will never give it up, ever. They have to be shown to have engaged in inappropriate conduct and even then getting even a censure is difficult. The argument being that a judge has to often make difficult decisions that severely impact the lives of others. Having them be constantly worried that a Monday morning quarterback is going to get them sued would prevent them from doing their job properly. I'm inclined to agree in this regard.
