The House could ignore the meaning of the term "good behavior" and impeach a Justice for political reasons. And the Senate could convict for political reasons. They have that power since there is no institution which could overrule them not even the Court. But they cannot honestly claim that this would be in direct contradiction with the idea of an independent judiciary as described within the Federalist.
While the Federalist is not law it is the first writing examined by Justices when looking for Original Intent among the Founders. Marshall consulted it regularly.
While you can pretend that "good behavior" means "unpopular in some circles decisions" that is not what the Founders had in mind.
In 1992, the chief justice published a book, "Grand Inquests," in which he recounted the politically driven effort to remove Justice Samuel Chase from the bench two centuries ago. Though Chase was impeached by the House, the Senate's decision not to convict and remove him "represented a judgment that impeaching should not be used to remove a judge for conduct in the exercise of his judicial duties," Chief Justice Rehnquist said Friday.
A bold, and incorrect assumption. The Senate refused to convict on the evidence presented at the time, in the case at hand.
They made no binding political judgment on the power or reasons to impeach.
Such a limitation could only be made by an Amendment to the Constitution.
-- Rehnquist is wrong on this issue, as proved by the Constitution itself.
The House could ignore the meaning of the term "good behavior" and impeach a Justice for political reasons. And the Senate could convict for political reasons.
Of course they could, but then they in turn would have to pay the political price. We have a system of checks & balances, remember?
They have that power since there is no institution which could overrule them not even the Court. But they cannot honestly claim that this would be in direct contradiction with the idea of an independent judiciary as described within the Federalist. While the Federalist is not law it is the first writing examined by Justices when looking for Original Intent among the Founders. Marshall consulted it regularly. While you can pretend that "good behavior" means "unpopular in some circles decisions" that is not what the Founders had in mind.
I'm pretending nothing. You're only imagining that I am..
Rehnquist is simply wrong in his effort to make it appear that impeachment can "not be used to remove a judge for conduct in the exercise of his judicial duties"... --- And he & his supporters will pay the political price.