Jump to content

Category talk:American judges

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Category Sorting

[edit]

We need to sort the pages in this category into their appropiate state or federal positions. I added the {{backlog}} template to get some attention. I've been working at it, but it's long, tedious work. Other help would be nice. Thanks, zappa.jake (talk) 07:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will assist with this matter. --ZsinjTalk 14:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rename/delete Category:Jurists of Hawaii? —Centrxtalk • 22:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Currently up for CfD after being repopulated into Category:Hawaii judges. --ZsinjTalk 15:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, perhaps we should further subcategorize into the respective Appellate Courts, etc. If that is to be done eventually, it would be more efficient to do it now. —Centrxtalk • 22:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moved state judges into Category:American judges by state

[edit]

FYI, I moved all of the state specific judge categories plus DC & Guam into Category:American judges by state. That way they're not all mixed up with other categories regarding federal judges and such. Hopefully that will make it easier to find a specific subcategory here. Dugwiki 22:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are American judges always lawyers?

[edit]

Are American judges always lawyers? In Canada for example, some judges of the "less important" courts such as small claims did not have law degrees. I also wonder about judges in earlier times. XOttawahitech (talk) 14:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a single American judge offhand who wasn't a lawyer. In earlier times, one did not need a degree to practice law (see reading law). bd2412 T 20:10, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mostly yes. Although it's not usually a technical requirement of the job, I think it's so common that it's okay to include it as a subcategory, if that's the point of this question. (What is the point of this question?) --Lquilter (talk) 23:42, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Lquilter: (and thanks to User: BD2412 ) Yes, you are correct,. this is the point of this question. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:18, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Almost 100% of judges are lawyers. You would be extremely hard pressed to find an exception that wasn't from early history. In the case of judges today, it is a requirement, with one notable exception: United States Supreme Court judges are not required to be lawyers... but there has never been a non-lawyer appointed. Greg Bard (talk) 18:02, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Gregbard: This category is not only for today's judges, is it? So should it have Category:American lawyers as a parent? Also you said there is no requirement for supreme court judges to be lawyers - so should your revert not be reverted? XOttawahitech (talk) 12:41, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When its upwards of 99%, its time to say "what's the deal?" It isn't like a coincidental quality. There is a reason why judges are almost all lawyers. In the rare instances in which, even historically, an appointed judge wasn't a lawyer, they were still practicing law in a real sense. Greg Bard (talk) 14:25, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]