Question for knowledgeable FReeQs:
POTUS / Senate have been putting in new judges at a great rate. I read that POTUS has now appointed 20% of federal judges. So that means that 80% are NOT appointed by POTUS. Of course it’s possible that SOME of them are honest.
So my question is this: When there is a trial, who decides which judge hears the case? Can POTUS choose? Barr? Other DOJ person? Is it random?
FYI as of yesterday 1 of 5 judges sitting on the Federal Bench were picked by @POTUS.
District Courts = 120
Circuit Courts = 48
Supreme Court = 2
Total Approved = 170
Judicial branch claims to be independent. It picks the judge. Venue is established by other rules, generally being the location of the crime or location of an actor.
Executive branch has no say, other than it can argue for recusal.
The Chief Justice of the SCOTUS, by the Constitution. But, just like the House, a Senate majority establishes the rules for the trial.
So my question is this: When there is a trial, who decides which judge hears the case? Can POTUS choose? Barr? Other DOJ person? Is it random?
Many thanks to all who answered this question, but I should have been more clear. I understand that the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS presides over a Senate trial for President. (Could be problematic at the moment.) But what I was really trying to ask about was all those trials for DS. All those sealed indictments.
When they get unsealed, how is the judge chosen for those cases?
I’d like to find out that the new POTUS picks will be the judges, but if they are chosen at random, then only 20% will be. (Hopefully not all of the remaining 80% of the judges are DS plants.)
I’d like to see a 100% conviction rate for the guilty (and of course 100% “not guilty” verdicts for anyone who is innocent). In other words, fair trials. Real justice. The end of two-tiered justice. As the democrats have been so fond of saying “NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.”