Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1 Democrats Introduce Bill, Impeachment for Justices Thomas and Scalia 
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    8,078
    eridani (41,540 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025200010

    Democrats Introduce Bill that Could Lead to Impeachment for Justices Thomas and Scalia
    http://www.politicususa.com/2013/08/...as-scalia.html

    On Thursday, a group of Democratic lawmakers proposed a law to establish a Code of Conduct for the Supreme Court. It’s sure to have Supreme Court Justices Thomas and Scalia quaking in their Tea Party boots because it would mean they would actually have to be independent of political and other influences. They would also have to have the appearance of independence. They would have to stay away from political activity. That part would be really hard.

    As it stands, this law would help guarantee that Supreme Court Justices are held to the same ethical standards we expect of other judges. The proposed law holds the Supreme Court to the same standards required of judges in the federal court system. Currently, Justices on the Supreme Court decide for themselves if they should recuse themselves from cases in which they may have a personal stake or in Thomas’ case, his wife has a political or financial stake as a holy roller in the Tea Party.

    Justices Thomas and Scalia who attended a few partisan fundraisers also ruled in favor of the conservatives raising questions about their independence. This was especially true in Citizens United because that ruling undid decades of established law.

    Both of these actions violate the code of conduct already in place for Federal court judges.

    The DUmmies collective knowledge of co-equal branches of power could fill a thimble:
    fasttense (15,549 posts)
    121. But this law is not necessary

    Congress already has the authority and power to control the Supreme Court. Its in the Constitution. But I suppose a law would more clearly define what behavior is expected of the justices.

    genwah (308 posts)
    80. Hear, hear! GOTV in November is what counts now. Any of us who can file suit, or whatever

    is already doing so, and will ask for help if needed.

    The Catholic 5 gave us a great organizing tool, let's not waste it. I don't give a damn about Nader of Clinton or George Clinton, I want Alison Grimes backing up Elizabeth Warren. I want a net loss of House seats for the greater of almost any evil party.

    ACT UP! FIGHT BACK! (WTF, it worked last time...)


    whathehell (13,107 posts)
    134. Please, pretty please?!!

    This would be a dream come true...The president could then elect two SANE justices!

    The DUmmies lust for a totalitarian regime in the U.S. is frightening.
    Last edited by txradioguy; 07-07-2014 at 08:06 AM.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,858
    The proposal would have disqualified all of Obama's appointees. They should be careful what they ask for.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,159
    I wonder if the left would be happy when the republicans would use this law against their pet justices?
    We're from Philadelphia, We Fight- Chip Kelly
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    8,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Bailey View Post
    I wonder if the left would be happy when the republicans would use this law against their pet justices?
    I think they believe that they will be in power forever and that no Republican will ever attain the Presidency every again.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    Senior Member Dan D. Doty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pevely, Missouri
    Posts
    3,012
    Quote Originally Posted by txradioguy View Post
    The DUmmies collective knowledge of co-equal branches of power could fill a thimble:



    The DUmmies lust for a totalitarian regime in the U.S. is frightening.
    No kidding.

    Progressives, the new face of Fascism
    CU's Paranormal Expert.


    Keep your powder dry, your sword sharp and your wits intact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    17,505
    whathehell (13,107 posts)
    134. Please, pretty please?!!

    This would be a dream come true...The president could then elect two SANE justices!
    Where does the president hold these secret elections????
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    eeeevil Sith Admin SarasotaRepub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Sunny,FL
    Posts
    43,440
    Quote Originally Posted by RobJohnson View Post
    Where does the president hold these secret elections????

    In Super-Secret-Supreme-Land!!!
    May the FORCE be with you!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    17,505
    Quote Originally Posted by SarasotaRepub View Post
    In Super-Secret-Supreme-Land!!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Senior Member Apache's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Tree rats are watching you
    Posts
    7,063
    Quote Originally Posted by RobJohnson View Post
    Where does the president hold these secret elections????
    ummm.... don't you need at least 3 people to elect something? One person could, say... appoint, install, select or insert... but not elect''

    Hooray publick edyoukayshun
    Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.
    Ronald Reagan

    We could say they are spending like drunken sailors. That would be unfair to drunken sailors, they're spending their OWN money.
    Ronald Reagan

    R.I.P. Crockspot
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Power CUer noonwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, MI
    Posts
    12,894
    High school government class was a long time ago. I'm assuming that Congress does have the power to impeach a Supreme Court Justice, but I'm also guessing that it takes more than a few rulings that some people don't like to do so. I would think the standard is misconduct or criminal behavior, not unpopular rulings.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •