Posted on 05/04/2016 7:53:28 AM PDT by huldah1776
A few years back I asked a number of people how long does a Supreme Court Justice serve. Almost unanimously the response was until death or resignation. No one’s response was constitutional. There is nothing in the Constitution that says a Supreme Court Justice or any other federal judge serves for life or until they resign.
Here is what the Constitution says about the term of office of a Supreme Court Justice or federal judge:
“Article III.
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.” [Emphasis mine]
There is nothing that says the appointments are for life, but does say they shall hold their office during good behavior.
What does it mean ‘good behavior’? Some have argued that means moral behavior but the most generally accepted understanding refers to how they conduct themselves on the bench and adhere a strict interpretation of the Constitution and the laws of land. First and foremost is adhering to the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at constitution.com ...
No kidding. Just imagine dropping Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law on every judge who has presided over a divorce w/o a jury (see amendment 7) — that right there would be a huge step in showing through actions that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.
Fark him and his mentally ill supporters.
That’s not a practical strategy.
You’re not going to get Congress to impeach any judge for handling divorce the same way all the other judges have handled divorce for decades.
Judges can be removed. My first wife’s mother was a state judge (about 42 years ago). She was removed from office, dis-barred, and served 18 months in a minimum security detention facility. Ticket fixing. When she got out, the best she could do for the rest of her life was court stenographer.
I am sure the fine people of Texas will find a suitable Senator to replace Cruz. And if not, we'll get a suitable transplant from Alberta, Canada.
Love your execution of the spoken word.
Now to thinking.
Alright, so Democrats define things differently than we do. Some wrongly even use other country rules as an influence in our law.
Democrat Underground...blah blah blah. Bottom line is you have to THINK about what happens to us under the same rules here under Democrat control.
Open hat Genie and expect pendulum courts more often than now swinging left.
A liberal which we oppose will always claim their interpretation is correct, not yours; so while we think it is logical that only people strictly adhering to the Constitution should get Judge robes, the other side will do the exact opposite. We would not be able to stop them that all either since there are far more takers than makers.
Ah, so "that's the way we've been doing it for decades" is a reason to ignore the constraints the Constitution places on the government? Interesting.
So I think you would also say that it's not practical to throw out the GCA and NFA? Right?
I think CGA and NFA are clearer cut cases with a very clear constitutional amendment that applies.
Divorce is mostly a state issue, not federal.
If Ifs were wood, and wood were good, we would not need maybes to warm our babies
Thank You thank you! Send all donations to ‘feedthestarvingpoet.com’
Congress isn’t going to remove them- The reason noone answered that they can be removed is that essentially they can’t/won’t- while it’s technically possible, it won’t happen-
Having said that- it’s never good to say never- (or won’t) so I’ll just leave with ‘it’s very very likely that it won’t happen’
WASHINGTON, Oct. 20— In a solemn two-hour proceeding, the Senate today removed Federal District Judge Alcee L. Hastings from the bench by convicting him of eight impeachment articles, including one charging that he had conspired to obtain a $150,000 bribe.
Judge Hastings sat silently facing the senators as Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia called out on the first article, ‘’Senators, how say you, Is the respondent guilty or not guilty?’’
The vote was 69 to 26, providing five votes more than the two-thirds of those present that were needed to convict. The first article accused the judge of conspiracy. Conviction on any single article was enough to remove the judge from office, and he left shortly after the vote. Hastings Assails Verdict
busted!
What does it mean ‘good behavior’?
It means whatever CONGRESS says it means, they are the ones in charge.
Congress has ALL the power in washington, the executive and judicial branch operate according to the whims of CONGRESS!
Congress can Remove the President
Congress can remove the head of every executive agency Congress can remove ALL of their employees
Congress can Abolish every agency they so choose
Congress can remove EVERY JUDGE IN AMERICA, including every supreme court justice.
Congress can abolish every federal court except the supreme Court
Congress can decide which cases the Judicial Branch can hear and decide
CONGRESS can Imprison ANYONE they want for any reason they so desire for as long as they wish.
Congress can declare WAR
No other governing body has even 10% of the power CONGRESS has!!
CONGRESS IS ALLOWING ALL OF IT!!!
Congress has the authority to arrest and imprison those found in Contempt. The power extends throughout the United States and is an inherent power (does not depend upon legislated act)
If found in Contempt the person can be arrested under a warrant of the Speaker of the House of Representatives or President of the Senate, by the respective Sergeant at Arms.
Statutory criminal contempt is an alternative to inherent contempt.
Under the inherent contempt power Congress may imprison a person for a specific period of time or an indefinite period of time, except a person imprisoned by the House of Representatives may not be imprisoned beyond adjournment of a session of Congress.
Imprisonment may be coercive or punitive.
Some references
[1] Joseph Story’s Commentaries on the Constitution, Volume 2, § 842 http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a1_5s21.html
[2] Anderson v. Dunn - 19 U.S. 204 - “And, as to the distance to which the process might reach, it is very clear that there exists no reason for confining its operation to the limits of the District of Columbia; after passing those limits, we know no bounds that can be prescribed to its range but those of the United States.” http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/19/204/case.html
[3] Jurney v. MacCracken, 294 U.S. 125 http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/294/125/case.html 73rd Cong., 78 Cong. Rec. 2410 (1934) https://archive.org/details/congressionalrec78aunit
[4] McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 - Under a warrant issued by the President of the Senate the Deputy to the Senate Sergeant at Arms arrested at Cincinnati, Ohio, Mally S. Daugherty, who had been twice subpoenaed by the Senate and twice failed to appear. http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/273/135/case.html
[5] Rules of the House of Representatives, Rule IV Duties of the Sergeant at Arms - [] execute the commands of the House, and all processes issued by authority thereof, directed to him by the Speaker. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/HMAN-105/pdf/HMAN-105-pg348.pdf
[6] An analysis of Congressional inquiry, subpoena, and enforcement http://www.constitutionproject.org/documents/when-congress-comes-calling-a-primer-on-the-principles-practices-and-pragmatics-of-legislative-inquiry/
And here is what the OFFICIAL DEMONRAT PUBLICATIONS SAY:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/04/opinion/04tue4.html
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2007/04/house_arrest.html
If a judge behaves according to blackmail demands, is that a good enough reason? IOW, if a judge is blackmailed to vote a certain way, regardless of which way the judge voted is going along with blackmail demands reason enough to impeach and remove? ... I would say yes, because a compromised judge is an enemy of the Constitutional process.
Thank you for that! I’ll read them all.
Yes blackmail is sufficient grounds to impeach a judge.
You have to be able to prove it though.
Not sure what you meant by ‘regardless of what way the judge voted’.
If he voted against the blackmail demands, that would indicate that the blackmail held no sway over the judge.
But really to remove any doubt a judge should go public with any blackmail demand.
How the judge voted was referring to DNC or GOP leanings.
Yeah, it shouldn’t matter. If he is compromised, he is compromised.
But just because someone threatens blackmail, the basis of the threat needs to be established. For example, someone recently threatened to file rape charges against Trump. There is no reason to believe there is any evidence supporting it. Just a political hack trying to make trouble. But had the threat been made privately instead of publicly, I don’t think Trump would necessarily have to make that public.
In other words, the blackmail attempt itself does not indicate the judge is compromised, because the blackmail may be baseless.
You can usually see "personal" in the vote by the women.
Don't forget, we started out as a one party system.
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.