TBH the words of an individual judge shouldn't mean too much now -> they are obviously very political judges now.

Judges have a pretty direct role in whether or not Flock is able to be used effectively (e.g. the article's example of one granting a search warrant based on the data from it). The views of judges on Flock unequivocally do matter in our current system regardless of how their opinions are formed.

▲

Madmallard 3 hours ago | parent [-]

? Flock is like one of many surveillance systems being installed in place.

The people in power are just circumventing everything on a whim to get what they want.

	▲	saghm 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's an entirely different claim than the one I responded to. If you don't think that judges matter at all, why are you not disagreeing with the parent comment that claimed that the issue is that judges are too political?

▲

JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> they are obviously very political judges now

They are—since 2000 Presidents have appointed more polarized judges [1]. (The broader trend began in 1975 [2].) But they’re just as powerful. Their words are absolutely meaningful.

[1] https://www.nber.org/papers/w32920

[2] https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2022/04/political-pola...