Friday Funnies:
Who Knew Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts Was Funny?

I am afraid someone is going to post criticizing commentary about judges not appreciating the seriousness of the situation for the accused. I respect that concern. I have been on both sides of counsel’s table and I know all-to-well that there is nothing funny about a trial when you’re in the box, and nothing to laugh at when you read that your request for appeal has been denied. BUT as a law student, I respect any effort by the bench to “lower” themselves to the level of the public they serve. This improves access to justice.

We have a public who often have no concept of how common law and legislation interact. Sadly, many people learn about the justice system from sensational news articles and (in my country of Canada) from outlandish political tough-on-crime rhetoric. If the occasional written reasons read like an entertaining narrative, it would be secretly educational and perhaps we would have an improved democratic system. Politicians couldn’t fear monger their way into office, the public would understand why the judiciary has fought against mandatory minimum sentence legislation, and people would have a greater understanding of how judges struggle with tossing a case on constitutional grounds before setting free a high profile accused.

In short, there might be less ignorance and greater compassion. We cherish our system of open courts, but then hide our decisions behind pedantic language, Latin legal maxims, and often judicial reasons that even legal scholars sometimes struggle comprehending. We can’t hold the public behind that self-affirming brass bar, and yet lament their media-fuelled hysterics about our seemingly broken system. The system works well. Let’s tell people about it.