Humanities desk
< November 2	<< Oct \| November \| Dec >>	November 4 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

November 3

Lower court judge pleading in favor of own judgement?

Are there any legal systems, where in lower court judge 'personally' pleads in favour/ support of their judgement before higher court judges, during judgement review appeals by plaintiff ?
Here conduct of lower court judge is not being examined but just their judgement is under regular review.
@ the place of lower court you can assume regional / state level higher court and in place of higher court you can assume federal Supreme Court.
Is there any jurisprudential discussion in favour of or against lower court judge personally pleading in favour of their judgement in higher level court?

Bookku (talk) 13:22, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Negatives are hard to prove, but I've never heard of such a thing in a jurisdiction following the (local) rule of law. In an appeal before a court of law, the two sides arguing the case are the defendant and the plaintiff, or in a criminal case the prosecution. In a civil case the judge cannot be aligned with the plaintiff – they should have recused themselves. And a judge cannot also be a prosecutor. So if they are pleading in an appeal to a case which they decided, it should be on the side of the defendant, who was acquitted or at least sentenced to milder terms than are being sought in the appeal. I think pleading for the other side is theoretically possible if the original judge left office and is now pursuing a career as attorney or prosecutor, and they did not personally participate in the case being appealed, which however was decided based on jurisprudence established by that former judge. --Lambiam 13:12, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I know it isn't possible as there is no precedence, but what is the reasoning behind such barring/limitation or why can't they be given an option to plead? Grotesquetruth (talk) 21:10, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For obvious reasons, there have to be rules for who can argue a case in court, which should include the parties in the case. Legislators have seen no reasons to add any third parties, other than for rules allowing them to intervene in a case under specific circumstances, such as that they have a substantial legal interest in the outcome. If a judge wants to present their view on relevant points of law, they can (at least in the US) file an amicus brief. And so can you. --Lambiam 08:21, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]