Danger in the Recall
dc.contributor.author | Taft, William | |
dc.date | 2021-11-25T13:34:38.000 | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-11-26T11:43:50Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-11-26T11:43:50Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1913-01-01T00:00:00-08:00 | |
dc.identifier | fss_papers/3949 | |
dc.identifier.contextkey | 4049595 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.13051/3389 | |
dc.description.abstract | In a popular government, the most difficult problem is to determine a satisfactory method of selecting members of its judicial branch. Where ought such power to be placed? It is a great one. It is said it ought not to be entrusted to irresponsible men. If this means that judges should not be men who do not understand the importance of the function they are exercising, or the gravity of the results their decision may involve, or do not exert energy and sincere intellectual effort to decide according to law and justice, every one must concur. But if it means that judges must be responsible for their judgments to some higher authority, so that for errors made in good faith they incur a personal liability, then we know from centuries of actual experience that the interest of justice, pure and undefiled, requires their immunity. Finality of decision is essential in every branch of the government, or else government cannot go on. This is as true of its judicial branches as of other branches. Therefore, somebody must have the final word in judicial matters, and the only question is who can best exercise this power. The answer to the question must be found in the real character of the function which the judges are to perform. | |
dc.title | Danger in the Recall | |
dc.source.journaltitle | Faculty Scholarship Series | |
refterms.dateFOA | 2021-11-26T11:43:50Z | |
dc.identifier.legacycoverpage | https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/fss_papers/3949 | |
dc.identifier.legacyfulltext | https://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4934&context=fss_papers&unstamped=1 |