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

Even without the votes to cook his goose, the American people deserve to hear Justice Kennedy explain why he now finds the Constitution irrelevant.
1 posted on 04/16/2005 1:57:56 PM PDT by Nasty McPhilthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Nasty McPhilthy

absolutely......impeach this goober


2 posted on 04/16/2005 1:59:21 PM PDT by kingattax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy

I wish that just one of these columnists would actually read the Roper v Simmons decision before writing their column.


3 posted on 04/16/2005 2:02:48 PM PDT by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy

Kennedy: "We need to reconsider the idea of private property."


4 posted on 04/16/2005 2:03:27 PM PDT by sergeantdave (Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy
According to the Constitution, the President negotiates treaties and they must be ratified by a two thirds vote in the Senate.

Kennedy cited an unratified treaty as Constitutionally binding law. All five justices who signed onto that opinion ought to be impeached. It is a crystal clear violation of their oath of office to uphold the Constitution and it doesn't need to be more complicated than that.
5 posted on 04/16/2005 2:06:30 PM PDT by Ragnorak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy

And the House should impeach not only Kennedy who wrote the decision, but also those Justices who concurred in the opinion. Doing so will have to effects. First, it will send a strong message to judges and Justices that their job is to interpret the law in light of the U.S. Constitution and its sources. Second, it will force the DemonRATS in the U.S. Senate to crap or get off the pot on the issue of fillibustering judicial nominees -- particularly if the Republicans in the Senate hold together and remove five of the Justices.


6 posted on 04/16/2005 2:06:34 PM PDT by Lunkhead_01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy

I absolutely agree. I was stunned to see him argue that America must use INTERNATIONAL LAWS to temper our laws - WHAT ..?? Since when ..??

Like Mark Levin says, this is their PERSONAL POLICY they are making - and they're not conforming to the Constitution. Therefore, because this justice has not lived up to his "good behavior" standard - he needs to be removed.


7 posted on 04/16/2005 2:09:35 PM PDT by CyberAnt (President Bush: "America is the greatest nation on the face of the earth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy

HERE, HERE (or is it HEAR, HEAR?)!!!


11 posted on 04/16/2005 2:21:54 PM PDT by JoeV1 (Democrat Party-The unlawful and corrupt leading the blind and uneducated)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Nasty McPhilthy

I'll tell you who "authorized" him: the majority of the SC, who were bound to know that he would invoke foreign law.

He's just one of 4, possibly 5, who are guilty of judicial highhandedness.


We need Constitutional judges ruling on the United States Constitution (and nothing else).


17 posted on 04/17/2005 4:48:36 AM PDT by hocndoc (Choice is the # 1 killer in the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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