Why do we accept the "judges are randomly assigned" trope?

[maxrandb]

In every post about this issue, there is always someone on DU telling folks to "relax" because, "after all, these judges are assigned these cases 'randomly'".

Maybe a little transparency would be nice. I would likely to know the details of these "random" assignments.

Does anyone know how this works?

When they pull the Power Ball numbers, it's done publicly. Should we accept it if they pulled them in secret and then said; "trust us, it was random"

Seems we are being told; "trust us, these judges are 'randomly' selected". It's just a coincidence that his judge was appointed by Donnie Dipshit and then confirmed by the Senate 3 days after he lost the election.

So, my question is; how is this 'random' assignment done?

Are they pulled out of a hat? Is that viewed publicly and audited? Does someone make sure that there is no stuffing of the hat?

Do they roll dice? Is an independent entity making sure the dice aren't weighted?

Is there a pattern? Like, does this judge get every third case? Anyone know what the rotation is, because if you did know that, you could ensure you got the judges you want.

Do they have all the judges pictures on a dart board and just shuck darts at it?

Maybe, they just put the judges pictures on the ground in a cow pasture, release a cow, and whoevers face gets shit on is the one?

How "random" is this "randomness"? Does anyone know?

Maybe judge Cannon should divulge her email and cellphone records to see if she "discussed" how random this assignment really is.

Maybe a Special Master could be assigned to review the courts correspondence, emails, texts and phone records leading up to her "random assignment".

I would like to see some of those questions answered, or at the very least, have some investigative reporting done on how this whole "random" assignment shit works...because if you believe this particular judge was randomly assigned this particular case, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to discuss with you.

[live love laugh]

1. Great questions. I anxiously await answers.

[pwb]

2. Her records should be looked at.

Good idea.

[SledDriver]

3. They put her name on 30 pieces of silver...

PAPER! 30 pieces of paper.

Put them in a hat.
Mixed them all around.
Reached in and pulled one out.

See? They "randomly" selected her that way.

[FBaggins]

4. It varies slightly from district to district

But it's usually a random process by computer that takes into account the current load of the judges in the district.

Trump tried to get this same judge a few months ago on another issue and failed. There are 18 seats (with three vacancies currently) and 13 senior judges with varying levels of retirement. Only five are Trump appointees.

[WarGamer]

8. There you go again FBaggins... introducing facts and reality into a perfectly good rant.

[FBaggins]

11. The remarkable thing is how similar the rant sounds

TFG made the same kinds of claims when this same district gave him a judge he didn't like.

[Kingofalldems]

42. I read the OP and it sounded nothing like Trump to me.

[FBaggins]

43. Then you read the OP but not TFG's parallel comments

The magistrate judge who approved the “raid” was not randomly selected, was clearly biased against him, and incompetently decided to approve a clearly partisan and unconstitutional search.

[maxrandb]

45. Thanks for putting words in my mouth

and greatly appreciate the comparison to Donnie Dipshit, but you miss my point.

I will straight up say that I firmly believe that this judge is corrupt as hell.

I also think that, after all the evidence of the lack of character and morals of Donnie Short Fingers anyone appointed to any position by this evil POS should voluntarily resign their position. But hey! If they can live with themselves knowing they will be tied to him, and carry that shame to their graves, that's fine by me.

But I digress.

What I am asking for is proof.

I want to know how the process worked that led to this judge being assigned this case. Is that too much to ask?

And BTW - "Because we said so" is not proof.

Please don't pee down my leg and tell me it's raining

[Atticus]

13. Yup! Gotta be "facts and reality" in this particular case 'cause it's on the internet. nt

[Hortensis]

46. Thanks, Baggins for, you know, like, injecting SOME INFORMATION.

[Hugh_Lebowski]

5. There could literally be a letter signed by IQ45 saying ...

"You have a choice, either you let me pay you $1M to decide this my way, or I'll sic my crazed supporters on you, Judge!!!"

And still nothing would happen to Trump.

That's not to say these aren't great questions

[asiliveandbreathe]

6. There is something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear..

There is a judge with a robe over there, telling us and the DOJ to beware..she has no intention of following the law..

An amicus brief denied..very well clear, there is something happening here..

Way above my pay grade..we have only hope, the DOJ has already got witnesses testimony, ie..where to search for classified, TS/SCI docs..and they got the evil bastard dead to right!!

Now, just a matter of time..this isn't the only case on the fire...there are plenty of cases working through the system..and YES, this judge should be investigated..

[onecaliberal]

7. It wasn't random. This woman prostituted our justice system like the boy who paid her.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

9. So the court system is corrupt?

This kind of feels like the kind of conspiracy theory the other side would claim a lot.

[brush]

17. It's becoming more and more obvious. The SCOTUS 6 Dobbs ruling,...

Beer Boy and Hand Maiden's presence on SCOTUS in the first place, the trump camp going judge shopping to pick Cannon for the special master request. And we must include her deeply flawed ruling granting a special master on the matter of EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE which trump does not have.

Let's no be naive. Do we have to go back to Citizens United or Bush v Gore?

[maxrandb]

19. "Random" selections done out of public view

is not a "conspiracy" theory.

I am simply asking three questions:

"What process is used to make those random judicial assignments?"

"Are those processes open to publicly scutiny? In other words, do we get to see the process as it occurs?"

and,

"Is there oversight to ensure that these assignments are truly random?"

Those seem like reasonable questions to ask in ANY case, let alone in a case that smells like this.

When the process is hidden from public view, but we are told to trust the process, well that's seems much more conspiritorial or naive than my 3 simple questions.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

26. But you are dealing with N1 here.

Your sample size is horrible. What about all the times Trump has filed a case or been on the other side and had a horrible judge for him? You can't look at one example and extrapolate that the whole system is corrupt.

[maxrandb]

33. I am NOT saying "the whole system is corrupt"

I do truly believe that this judge is definitely corrupt.

My point is this.

My sample size would not matter if the assignment decision process was public.

I would still have a problem with this judge being assigned this case, but, if the names of 5 different judges were put into a hat, and her name was pulled in public view, I would accept that it was "random".

I hate to sound like Bob Boudelang, but what I am saying is this;

"These judges assignments are not random, so quit saying that"

"Hey, trust me! I went behind closed doors and pulled straws, and you lost"

That is what I am struggling to believe and accept.

[Torchlight]

28. I don't think it any more conspiratorial

than asserting the court system is inherently weighted towards those with more money.

[Nevilledog]

31. #13

[Mz Pip]

10. I don't believe in coincidences.

This reeks to high heaven.

[inthewind21]

14. Me either

But I do believe if you file a law suit every other day, your odds increase of getting who you want.

[bluestarone]

12. I would also like to see how the system works.

Someone HERE mention she was the ONLY judge available? I seen NO proof to this, BUT dam would be nice to know and SEE if it's possible for TFG's lawyers to KNOW where she was and was available! Above it was mentioned that TFG wanted this very samw judge before. THAT in it self tells me they are watching and waiting. Please can someone help us out as to exactly how this happened. Is it possible this judge was the ONLY judge available at this time? IF they are judge shopping, what can be done about it? TY to whomever has the answer.

[inthewind21]

16. It's called

judge shopping. Something Trump is quite skilled in. Anyone can do it. If you have the $$$ to run around filing in different courts.

[former9thward]

24. Your CT fall apart because the motion was filed in the court it was supposed to be filed in.

It was not filed in different courts.

[brush]

15. Nothing random about Cannon getting the special master request...

case. The trump camp went judge shopping.

[former9thward]

21. Where is the evidence of that?

[brush]

23. Have you been in a cave all week? It's all over the news.

[former9thward]

25. Then you should be able to post a link.

[brush]

27. Grow up. Don't try that on me. Read DU. Do your own research.

Watch MSNBC. Cannon was not the magistrate judge on the case and even she questioned trump's lawyers why they came to her, but she took the case nonetheless and did what she was supposed to do for trump.

[former9thward]

30. I guess the DOJ must be really out of it.

How come they are not raising these arguments? Because they don't watch the right cable shows?

[brush]

34. You are making no sense whatoever. The judge just injected...

weeks to months, maybe years into the case whether the DOJ appeals or not. She also injects the issue of whether there is trump's executive privilege to possess documents in the case which is quite flawed as Joe Biden is the executive and has ruled trump does not have executive privilege (which everyone should know as he's not the president).

Either way, appealing it or not, it delays against trump. Catch up.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

35. Can you link to the article that stats he was able to pick his judge?

Because that's not how it works and the DOJ would not stand for it.

[brush]

36. You too with the naivete? I don't have time. The DOJ can...

appeal the judge's ruling but can't overrule it as you seem to be insinuating. Even Bill Barr and every other legal expert opining on news shows is blasting the judge's ruling as deeply flawed.

Catch up.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

38. Nice strawman you built. Too bad it isn't my argument.

I'm not saying the decision is solid. I am asking that you support your claim that Trump was able to pick this judge and that it wasn't random.

[brush]

39. Just read the many DU posts on it. Cannon was not the...

magistrate judge who the trump attorneys should've went to as is normal legal procedure. The case was not assigned to Cannon. They went to her.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

52. The magistrate can't do what a judge can do.

That is why they didn't go to the magistrate.

[Disaffected]

40. Stop dodging

Last edited Wed Sep 7, 2022, 12:23 AM - Edit history (1)

and cough up some evidence for your assertion or withdraw.

Please.

[brush]

41. The evidence is right in the open to anyone paying attention.

Cannon was not the original magistrate judge who was assigned the case. She was not randomly assigned the case as Cuthbert seems to think. The trump attorneys when to her jurisdiction and filed. She did what they wanted her to do.

Got it?

[Disaffected]

47. Got what?

More of the same....

[brush]

48. Comprehension problem?

[Disaffected]

49. You truly are

a font of wit and wisdom.

Bye.

[Disaffected]

50. You truly are

a font of wit and wisdom.

Bye.

[FBaggins]

51. Except that your claimed "evidence" is either irrelevant or false

With the exception of the last - that she did what they wanted her to do.

Cannon was not the original magistrate judge who was assigned the case.

Irrelevant since this isn't the type of case that magistrate judges handle in the first place.

She was not randomly assigned the case as Cuthbert seems to think.


A claim without evidence except for the following:

The trump attorneys when to her jurisdiction and filed.

Which is untrue.

It was true of a previous case (where Trump tried to sue Hillary Clinton and some others). Trump filed in "her jurisdiction" (sic) and ended up with judge Middlebrook (a Clinton appointee) instead. It isn't true in this case.

Trump’s lawyers filed his request for a special master to review the Mar-a-Lago documents in the court’s Palm Beach County division, but it ended up with Cannon, which can happen when courts randomly assign new cases across different locations within a district.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-06/trump-appointed-judge-courts-controversy-with-mar-a-lago-order

[otchmoson]

18. Question re: citizenship

Does anyone know how to locate information regarding Cannon's citizenship. Her mother was Cuban; she was born in Colombia. Was her father an American citizen? Did she apply for naturalization? Just curious.

[TheRealNorth]

20. I used to think Mace Windu attempting to kill Darth Sidious in "Revenge of the Sith" ...

I used to think that Mace Windu attempting to kill Darth Sidious in "Revenge of the Sith" was extreme. But after the past 6 years, I see Windu's logic.

[former9thward]

22. I doubt you will accept the actual answers to your "questions".

But in case anyone else is wondering:

Judge assignment methods vary. The basic considerations in making assignments are to assure equitable distribution of caseloads and avoid judge shopping. By statute, the chief judge of each district court has the responsibility to enforce the court's rules and orders on case assignments. Each court has a written plan or system for assigning cases. The majority of courts use some variation of a random drawing. One simple method is to rotate the names of available judges. At times judges having special expertise can be assigned cases by type, such as complex criminal cases, asbestos-related cases, or prisoner cases. The benefit of this system is that it takes advantage of the expertise developed by judges in certain areas. Sometimes cases may be assigned based on geographical considerations. For example, in a large geographical area it may be best to assign a case to a judge located at the site where the case was filed. Courts also have a system to check if there is any conflict that would make it improper for a judge to preside over a particular case.

https://www.uscourts.gov/faqs-filing-case

[maxrandb]

29. Thanks! Yes, I accept the answer provided

Appreciate your posting this.

After reading what you posted, I would hope that you would also acknowledge that:

a. It's not truly random, as what you posted states; "at times, judges can be assigned on the basis of 'expertise', or 'geographical location'". IOW "not random".

b. There is NO public or independent oversight of the assignment process.

Would I be a conspiracy nut if I suggested legislation to ensure public and independent oversight of the assignment process?

At the very least, I would hope your posted information would put to bed the idea that those assignments are random.

[former9thward]

32. Government is not public.

It never has been and never will be. Do we get to see/hear the inner workings of legislation in Congress? Nope. Not a word of what goes on in offices and lunches and dinners. We just see the vote. Do we get to see/hear what takes place in the Oval Office? Nope. Not a single word. Just a few photo ops now and then.

[maxrandb]

44. Not saying that either

I know that government is NOT public.

What we are being required to accept is that this particular judge was assigned this particular case "randomly".

Now, I don't know what your definition of random is, but nowhere in my definition is the phrase "trust us, it was random".

We accept and even acknowledge that there is back room, behind the scenes dealing when it comes to legislation. That is what governing requires. It requires "give and take". When Senator Smuckatelli suddenly supports legislation that he opposed, and we find out that $10M is going to a bridge in his district, we would laugh if they said; "wow, that's $10M just showed up randomly".

But we are not talking about legislation. We are talking about justice.

I know and acknowledge that there are all kinds of pre-trial deals and plea agreements made behind the scenes in legal cases.

But when it comes to justice, we are told that it is "fair and free of favor"

You know, that may not be true, but we damn well better be able to believe that it is true, because that is something worth believing

Justice, we are told, is a search for the truth. There is no "give and take" when it comes to the truth.

And again, there are going to be some people that will scream that this judge is corrupt no matter how she rules.

There are going to be people that simply will not believe that her selection for this case was "random".

I am saying, if I had seen how she was selected...if it were public...if they put 13 numbers in the Bingo Machine, and I watched it pop-up her number, I wouldn't like that, but I would accept that it was random.

[Baitball Blogger]

37. Good post. Nothing is random in Florida.