"Paraphrasing of course."
If they weren't deciding such important issues, Scalia et al. should write their opinions as "Well, they do it like so and so in Europe, so we'll assume that the correct course is the OPPOSITE..."!
I am not a lawyer. My only claim to scholarship is I know how to point and click and turn an occasional book page.
I have not read the opinion. But . . .
I would say, "no," they cannot be impeached for "citing international law and custom and not our Constitution be impeached and removed from the high court for delving outside of our Constituion."
From what I have heard and read, the reference is made as "dictum", as a judge's "expression of opinion on a point other than the precise issue involved in determining a case" (Webster's definition)
In other words, reference to outside facts and practices sheds light on the judge's reasoning and is not binding in any way.
We may not like it, but in this instance, I do not think Kennedy did something he could not do.
Most of them have been raping the constitution and lady justice since the 1940's.
No foreign decision, statute or precedent of any sort may be cited in any way, shape or form in rulings pertaining to the Constitutionality of any criminal statute or practice of the United States or any state. Violation of this statute by a judicial officer of the United States shall constitute an impeachable offense.
It has to be limited to criminal statutes because foreign precedents have been cited as authority in civil cases for as long as the United States has existed, particularly in commercial cases and admiralty/maritime law. I recommend the specific reference to impeachable offense to remove any doubt about the potential penalty.
Such a new law would have major separation of powers problems, but the Supreme Court doesn't hesitate to usurp the powers of the legislative and executive branches so tough. Impeach judges for violating it and they'll get the idea.
The danger in any republican form of government is that you must trust your leaders to be moral people. The federal courts have increasingly become mere political tools, and it appears the edifice of the High Court itself may be cracked. In fact, judging by the Berger and Warren courts, there's little doubt.
Maybe a process outside our Constitution can be used to remove Supreme Court justices.
I wonder if Justice Kennedy will look to the international communtiy when determining if displays of the 10 commandments are unconstitutional?
bump
Yes, they can. Will they? Hah!
I'm for impeachment.
I take it the Liberal Judges are going to hang on till 2008, and not retire.
If we are that serious about impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Kennedy, then I say lets bomb our Reps with emails in our States and put alot of pressure on them....Emails should be sent to Rush and Sean Hannity, to see if they would help us get the project started, and then hopefully, the bias media will pick up on it and have a blurp on it, just enough to get the rest of the people knowing what is going on, and just maybe, cross your fingers, maybe this would work....we can only give it a try....
"..justice(s) citing international law and custom and not our Constitution.."
This Nation became a, and then, 'the' World leader by following our own noses AND The Constitution by leaders who stuck to those principles, and NOT international law or customs. Is America a follower or a Leader.. I say we are the leaders of the free world and maybe if the international community sees fit, let them follow our lead. That's their choice. But not the other way around.
We need to stick to uncompromisable principles (Bedrock of our Foundation) that don't waiver under pressure, sentiment, can be bought, or looks to see which way the wind is blowing. The Constitution is 'that' set of principles (Laws). Any Judge that cites 'other' laws, outside the Constitution for making decisions is impeachable, IMO.
Yes. But first they need to be something to be impeached for. And this ain't it.
This decision uses the 'cruel and unusual' wording. It is a stretch, but it is the way the actual words of the Constitution are often stretched to cover a situation that was just about obviously not the intent of the Constitution.
As a practical matter, we don't have enough senators.
In order to successfully impeach a Supreme Court justice--and certainly several of them deserve to be impeached--you would need two things: widespread popular support among the voting public, and a 2/3 majority in the Senate.
At the moment we have neither, and with the news media 95% liberal it may be hard to get the requisite popular support.