Lawmaker seeks to impeach judge on homophobia ruling

Denver Post ^ | Friday, March 19, 2004 | Colleen Slevin

[Unam Sanctam]

"Impeachment is a last resort for cases of gross wrongdoing or clear unfitness of character," Andrews said. "It should not be used to settle policy differences, even something as highly charged as this case."

What muddled thinking! This is not a "policy difference", it is the case of a judge denying religious liberty to a citizen.

[CzarNicky]

at last a bit of sanity prevails

[rottndog]

Failing impeachment, they should find a noose and the closest tree....

[thoughtomator]

That's too merciful. Drawing and quartering is more just.

[rottndog]

I didn't say hang him by the neck.

[thoughtomator]

Amen

[jwalsh07]

Thanks, you saved me the trouble but I will comment on the gutlessness of the legislators and point out that this is the reason the the FMA is necessary. Legislators just don't have the wherewithal or the votes to rein in judges gone wild.

[KC_Conspirator]

Its about time someone started impeaching judges because of their tyranny from the bench.

[lowbridge]

I didn't say hang him by the neck.

You mean marry him off to Hillary?

[supercat]

Failing impeachment, they should find a noose and the closest tree....

I don't know. It's been too long since officials have had to worry about being tarred and feathered.

[rottndog]

OOOOO that's harsh.

[B Knotts]

Bill Owens disappoints on this. He seems to show a cowardly side.

[tutstar]

what a crock!

But it's probably A-OK for the child to read something like another child found in their school library.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1100893/posts

[rottndog]

That's the whole problem. If they knew that they couldn't and wouldn't get away with their totalitarianism, they would do what they are supposed to do and UPHOLD the law.

[Sofa King]

It hasn't prevailed yet. Let's see if this guy actually gets thrown out on his ass before we start celebrating.

[WOSG]

This kind of talk was shared in another thread about another questionable ruling. I didnt think much of it, but someone spoke out vehemently that it was in bad taste and wrong. In retrospect, he was right. If DUmmies said this stuff about Bush, we'd be livid and rightly so.

I dont think it is wise or appropriate to express our frustrations with illegitimate judicial activism by advocating violence of any kind, even in a joking manner. This is not any real answer, it tarnishes FR as a place of advocating violence, and creates heat not light. And who knows if a kook would take it seriously and do harm?
Bad judges need to be removed from responsibility not attacked physically or given death threats - That's the way of terrorists.

Now, impeachment and using Article III section 2 power to regulate the powers of the judicial branch to restore judicial restraint and the rule of law - yes.
Vigilante behavior or jokes about it - no.

[thoughtomator]

You're correct, and I do apologize. It is only because it could not be seriously considered a proper course of action that I saw it fit for humor. Impeachment is definitely something that must be pursued in earnest, and in volume.

[beaversmom]

Even though I live in Colorado I don't follow state politics that closely (more interested in national/global affairs) but I believe Owen's has been a mushy conservative on several things if I'm remembering correctly--guns and immigration are coming to mind but I can't remember the exact stories.

[rottndog]

What happens when all of the afore mentioned options don't work? Do we just lay down and submit to dictatorial judges?
What good are laws when they are ignored by those charged with upholding them?