Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Impeachment Of Supreme Court Justice(s)?

Posted on 03/02/2005 2:55:26 PM PST by Road Warrior ‘04

Not sure if this question should be posted as vanity, but here it is:

Constitutional scholars and lawyers: If Supreme Court Justices cite International Law to come to a decision, as they did in the death penalty for minors case, can the justice(s) citing international law and custom and not our Constitution be impeached and removed from the high court for delving outside of our Constituion?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: deathpenalty; impeachment; ruling; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-145 next last
To: sitetest
I do not believe that precedent would ever be established.
21 posted on 03/02/2005 3:04:55 PM PST by verity (The Liberal Media is America's Enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

They could be, if we had representative of the people in Congress, but unfortunately, all we have is a bunch of sackless wimps, thieves and commies.


22 posted on 03/02/2005 3:06:22 PM PST by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (It's down to us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
Judges can be removed if they no longer are serving with "good behavior" which is a much lower standard than for the President "Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."

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.

23 posted on 03/02/2005 3:06:24 PM PST by Tai_Chung
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OK
it seems like it is reasonable to look at global customs to decide what should be considered cruel or unusual punishment

Wouldn't it be more reasonable to look at what was considered the norm (and therefore presumably not creuel and unusual) in the Founders' day? I mean, after all, that's what will tell us what they meant by the phrase.

24 posted on 03/02/2005 3:06:37 PM PST by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Claytay
Congress has the power to impeach them but unfortunately they don't have the nerve to.

Oh, I think Congress has plenty of nerve, and plenty of good judgment.

The problem is, the congressmen with the nerve lack the judgment, and those with the judgment lack the nerve.

Dan
Biblical Christianity BLOG

25 posted on 03/02/2005 3:08:35 PM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: verity
The precedent has already been established.

- Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, 1805: Chase was charged with eight articles of impeachment See link in my earlier post.

26 posted on 03/02/2005 3:08:41 PM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: OK

No, looking at other countries law is not what a judge should do.One of these judges pointed out that was what Thomas Jefferson did. I say yes, he was a law maker not a judge!


27 posted on 03/02/2005 3:08:47 PM PST by alienken (Bumper sticker idea- We have God in heaven & a Texan in the whitehouse,LIFE IS GOOD!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bill1952
If the House votes for impeachment, the Senate holds a trial, with the Chief Justice of the United States presiding, to determine whether the person shall be convicted and removed from office.

But since we're talking about the impeachment of SC judges, shouldn't the CJ have to recuse himself as too close to the "defendant"? Who presides if it's the CJ himself that's being impeached?

28 posted on 03/02/2005 3:09:01 PM PST by Still Thinking (Disregard the law of unintended consequences at your own risk.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bill1952

Though isn't that regarded as one of Jefferson's worst moments?


29 posted on 03/02/2005 3:09:24 PM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: OK
it is reasonable to look at global customs to decide what should be considered cruel or unusual punishment

So who gets to decide what is REASONABLE? Can the SCOTUS look to the Religion of Islam to decide whether or not the 10 commandments can be displayed in public areas? How about looking to Saudia Arabia and most of the Middle East to decide women's rights?

One could go on and on and on, but to source foriegn law, customs and practices CHERRY PICKING STYLE is ridiculous and not adhering to the US CONSTITUTION which is the only SOURCE they should use.

30 posted on 03/02/2005 3:09:32 PM PST by PISANO (We will not tire......We will not falter.......We will NOT FAIL!!! .........GW Bush [Oct 2001])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

I think they SHOULD BE. Like I said in a previous post, Congress should use its impeachment powers when federal officials are not following their constitutional Oaths or are not behaving themselves--& impeachment does not apply to the President only. They have sworn an Oath to follow our Constitution; to hell w/ "international law" & the laws of other countries! America is (still) a SOVEREIGN NATION, althought that is slowly being whittled away at.


31 posted on 03/02/2005 3:09:56 PM PST by libertyman (It's time to make marijuana legal AGAIN!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

We couldn't even impeach an intern-sucking President who lied under oath to a Grand Jury. How could we ever impeach a Supreme Court Justice who's biggest crime was using inappropriate sources as the basis of his/her decisions. I understand all of the issues here and I WISH we could remove them for this, but the reality is that we cannot.


32 posted on 03/02/2005 3:09:57 PM PST by Spiff (Don't believe everything you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

I don't know about impeachment BUT the Congress SHOULD have at least super majority veto power over the SCOTUS.
The courts and specifically this court has long been out of control and is getting worse every day


33 posted on 03/02/2005 3:09:57 PM PST by clamper1797 (This Vietnam Vet ain't Fonda Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OK
However, it seems like it is reasonable to look at global customs to decide what should be considered cruel or unusual punishment.

If we are going to have the death penalty, and I think we should, then use it. Cruel and unusual punishment is what the murderers do to their victims!

34 posted on 03/02/2005 3:10:16 PM PST by Road Warrior ‘04 (Kill 'em til they're dead! Then, kill 'em again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1

As we discovered with Pres. Clinton, the Senate will not play ball. An impeachment requires 2/3 doesn't it?


35 posted on 03/02/2005 3:10:41 PM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1
If Supreme Court Justices cite International Law to come to a decision, as they did in the death penalty for minors case, can the justice(s) citing international law and custom and not our Constitution be impeached and removed from the high court for delving outside of our Constituion?

Wel, according the Constitution (Article II, Sec. 4) says "The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

(Sitting judges are considered civil officers of the United States.)

The question then is, is "...citing international law and custom and not our Constitution" either a high Crime or Misdemeanor?

36 posted on 03/02/2005 3:10:50 PM PST by yankeedame ("Born with the gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PISANO

"I am neither a scholar nor a lawyer but common sense tells me that when one takes an oath to uphold the US Constitution and then uses foriegn laws, customs and practices as a SOURCE for any decision rather than the US Constitution, and customs laws and practices of THIS nation, they are open for Impeachment.

If I am wrong then their oath is meaningless."

You're exactly right. They swore an oath to uphold the U.S. Consitution. Instead they bowed to the wimps in Europe who would do anything in their power to weaken the social and moral foundations of America. They should be impeached.

.


37 posted on 03/02/2005 3:11:56 PM PST by RichardW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OK
it seems like it is reasonable to look at global customs to decide what should be considered cruel or unusual punishment.

This is another ditch to avoid. If "radical" Islam becomes the majority of the world...does it become "normal" to shoot women in the head publically for not being faithful? Or stone folks to death? What about countries where it is NOW normal for thieves to have their hands chopped off? Should we consider that?

We(our Founders, THIS country) fought for independence for many reasons and against more than one enemy to get away from bad law then. Why should we even glance at their law(or lack of it) now?

38 posted on 03/02/2005 3:12:06 PM PST by Johnny Crab (Always thankful.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: verity

Dear verity,

Well, in the case of the presidency, it almost was.

President Andrew Johnson was impeached by the House of Representatives and came within one vote of being convicted in the Senate basically for having fired a member of his Cabinet.


sitetest


39 posted on 03/02/2005 3:12:36 PM PST by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Bushbacker1
I vote: AYE!
40 posted on 03/02/2005 3:13:30 PM PST by F16Fighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-145 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson