“Those are opinions which won’t be sufficient for removal. Like it or not the Constitution defines these judgeships as lifetime appointments to be held during “good behavior”. As long as a judge complies with that standard they are safe from impeachment.”
Generally when a man says standards he means some substantive limit to their behavior. As far as I can tell their ain’t no substantive limit defining “Good Behavior” for Federal judges.
“There have been several opinions over the course of our history which were unconstitutional in my opinion but that is only an opinion.”
If their own opinion of the limits of their own and their masters authority is all that matters then they ain’t got no constitution of any kind just as they ain’t got no limits of any kind.
If this is the “American system” as some contend, then the “American system” ain’t got nothing to do with any kind of written Constitution and is entirely defined by it’s arbitrary federal Government.
We have a constitution which must be interpreted from time to time and the Supreme Court is established to do that in the final analysis. We cannot have three or four or a million interpretations as to what it may mean.
Defining “Good Behavior” is problematic but can be interpreted by the standards of the Founders. I would say that history has shown that it is pretty much limited to not committing criminal acts. I don’t know of any ideological impeachments and convictions of federal judges but several for criminality such as Alsee Hastings.
No document speaks for itself not even the Ten Commandments.
Since the Constitution contains the means of correcting and modifying itself rulings of the Court can be overruled by amendment when we don’t like the results. I am not even sure that Congress does not have the ultimate authority under the “Exceptions Clause” to determine what cases the Court hears.