Posted on 11/21/2012 7:28:29 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Impeached?
Constitutionally, yes, they can.
Practically, no. It was tried once and failed.
Sorry for the double post. Don’t know how that happened; I only said it once.
“With his position as Chief Justice, don’t you think he could stop ANY “opening” of his children’s adoption papers?”
Nope, if he used legal channels against an extralegal file search and wikileaks-type data dump, I suspect the legal channels would not work. And if he tried, it would focus the media’s magnifying glass on him in bright sunshine.
Obama’s people opened sealed legal files twice to zot opponents, and Allread opened some of Romney’s files. They have a history of doing this.
RE: Chief Justice John Roberts’ decision will eventually lead to single payer (gubmint) healthcare and the total loss of freedom. But who’s really to blame? Lee Harvey Oswald.
________________________
John Roberts said that his decision should not be taken as a message that the Affordable Care Act is Good or Bad Law. THAT IS UP FOR THE VOTERS TO DECIDE.
And guess what? The American Voters had the chance to do it on November 2012. They decided to keep it.
That’s the answer to your question.
I personally think Roberts was threatened, too. In fact, he was publicly threatened. The Democrats have learned how to defeat our election system, through bribes and intimidation.
Saw him in Port Clyde, Maine this summer. He was dressed in very pretty white duds with a tiny little white hat on his head. He had a VERY big bodyguard with him.
Constitutionally, [Supreme Court Justices can be impeached]. Practically, no. It was tried once and failed.I thought that might be the answer. It should be difficult to impeach a SCOTUS judge (otherwise it would be really political), and I suspect that Roberts is clever enough to walk the line and keep it hard to impeach him.
OK then if it was A TAX then why wansn;t it shot down doe having originated in the Senate (all tax bills must come from the house)
You haven't seen that photo? Saw it on a thread last week. Robert's looks like a gay caballero on vacation with some guy friends....
Whatever his motivation, he solidified his legacy as just another second rate justice who crapped on the constitution.
RE: OK then if it was A TAX then why wansn;t it shot down doe having originated in the Senate (all tax bills must come from the house)
__________________________
That’s the problem with Justice Robert’s decision.
If as he says, the law AS WRITTEN is unconstitutional because you cannot penalize someone for not purchasing a product he does not want, then, he should have thrown the bill back to Congress to be RE-WRITTEN so that it WILL BE WRITTEN AS A TAX AND NOT AS A PENALTY.
But he didn’t do that. What he and the 4 others did was RE-IMAGINE the Penalty to be a Tax, clearly over-riding the intent of the law and in effect, LEGISLATING from the bench.
This is a very dangerous and bad precedent.
His street cred is only going to matter so long as Kennedy, Scalia, Alito and Thomas stay on the Court. Any of those (good possibility of the first two) leave before there’s another GOP President and he’s going to find himself on the “4” side of a lot of 5-4 decisions.
Apparently this is the photo in question.
http://libertysflame.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=31033
One Swallow does not a Summer make.
To reiterate:
"One Swallow does not a Summer make."
What do you mean? An African or European swallow?
Both reasons are ridiculous. First, he could vote conservatively on every decision and it wouldn’t matter what anyone thought about it, since he has a lifetime appointment. Second, he could have written the majority decision and “stuck it to Obama” even if he had voted against Obamacare, since his was the deciding vote, and he is the Chief Justice, so that is his prerogative.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.