[Sprite518]

Your treading on a slippery slope again.

A Judge exercising his Constitutional Authority in the Judicial branch is not breaking the law. Witness to what Crime?

To subpoena a Judge every time a decision the Legislative branch does not like it does not mean the Judge has to respond to it. Sorry it does not work that way and that is why you don’t ever see it. LOL!

You can live in fantasy land all you want, but what you are talking about is absurd. It’s also a waste of time and energy.

It will never happen and it’s why people are laughing at Newt. Statements like this makes Independent voters not want to vote for him. It just makes him look stupid.

But go on and keep wasting your time and energy on something that will never happen.

[TigersEye]

You didn't like the first SCOTUS ruling on Congressional subpoena and contempt powers that I gave you? Here's another one.

Contempt of Congress

The Court held in Eastland v. United States Servicemen's Fund[4] that Congressional subpoenas are within the scope of the Speech and Debate clause which provides "an absolute bar to judicial interference" once it is determined that Members are acting within the "legitimate legislative sphere" with such compulsory process. Under that ruling, Courts generally do not hear motions to quash Congressional subpoenas; even when executive branch officials refuse to comply, the Courts tend to rule that such matters are "political questions" unsuitable for judicial remedy.

You can continue to argue that SCOTUS justices don't have to comply with Federal laws that they themselves have upheld if you want to.

[TigersEye]

Your treading on a slippery slope again. A Judge exercising his Constitutional Authority in the Judicial branch is not breaking the law. Witness to what Crime?

Making a ruling that violates the Constitution. Is the Constitution the slippery slope you're referring to?