But of course a court can't dismiss someone's complaint on the grounds that they're nuts; in order to rule on the substance of this case, a court would have to conduct new hearings to gather all the details about the original hearing in which AI was allegedly used. The purpose of judicial immunity is to push all objections to judicial decisions through the appellate courts, which don't have to re-hear everything before issuing a ruling.
Other articles by volokh might be intentionally incendiary (I haven't read them) but this one is as bland as bland gets.
__s•2h ago
delichon•1h ago
rcxdude•1h ago
laughing_man•1h ago
You would probably have a really good shot at an appeal, too.
FireBeyond•31m ago
delichon•1h ago
treebeard901•54m ago
In practice the entire system has become political, corrupted or both. As a result, the only rights most people have are those where officers of a court are only limited by where their immunity ends. They can and do violate the law and ignore large parts of it if it suits them.
Assuming someone has the resources to even get any oversight at all, in most cases those involved will investigate each other and decide they have done nothing wrong. Even in the unlikely event that someone proves an illegal act, they will just claim immunity.
FireBeyond•34m ago
ButlerianJihad•48m ago