When legislators appoint judges a person from which group is more likely to be selected by a member of the legal profession.
A president is more likely to appoint judges who would agree with him ideologically, and therefore, would be opposed by his ideological rivals in the Senate.
Some legislators are considered electorally safe because they are popular. They are considered that because they would likely win any election.
An ad hoc committe PLATO
a is selected by 63 out of 287 - a rate of 63/287. b is selected at a rate of 23/301. Selection rate for a/selection rate for b = (63/287)/(23/301) = 0.2195/0.0764 = 2.8727 Ie a is likely to be selected 2.8727 times as often as b, or a is 1.8727 times more likely to be selected.
If federal judges are elected, there can be less partisanship - if they are appointed, the politician appointing them will likely choose judges who agree with them politically.
Yes. Although the Book of Judges records that there were a number of Judges who reigned together, most were operative at different times, with gaps of years in between.
The court will appoint an executor. If there is controversy, they are likely to appoint an attorney or bank to serve, which will cost the estate more money.
If a person was deemed to have a higher level of attractiveness then they were more likely to get lower fines by Texas judges, so if people were believed to have a lower level of attractiveness they were more likely to get higher fines.
The court has that ability. If the spouse has requested that it be changed, they are likely to do so. They are also likely to appoint a neutral party, such as an attorney or a bank.
tex
go research it your self
no, because you most likely have improved since then.