I take your point and understand it.

To some of us, this would appear to be a necessary evil and and the price we pay for having an open court system. I really, truly feel that the people must have complete access to the judiciary and the courts, and that we must err on the side of liberty whenever we have a choice.

My mind goes to Greece in the late sixties and early seventies, when Greek judges, sitting in front of their big pictures of the King who had appointed them, were the only thing standing between the military junta and hundreds of people who would have been tortured to death.

 

i see your point as well. however, the court system needs to be used for legitimate claims and not flooded with these get rich quick lawsuits. the bill specifically bans court cases based on being obese from eating too much fast food. apparently the public needs common sense in writing these days. when using common sense as a basis for thought, we all know that if you eat mcd's all day every day you're going to put on weight. the end consumer always feels the brunt of these legal battles anyway in one way or the other.

 

Every big corporation keeps a certain amount of legal staff on hand at all times. Showing up to court just to have a case thrown out presents little to no burden on them whatsoever. A case that doesn't make it to trial is far from any sort of "legal battle." They don't need to be protected from these lawsuits that will obviously be thrown out, at the expense of access to the court system.

You're right: the court system should not be filled up with pointless get rich quick scams and that is why judges are given the ability to choose which cases go to trial.