Ever since Obama locked up his documents (including the ones that prove his constitutional eligibility)I knew Obama wanted to make void the US Constitution.
What a dick!
Amazing, he wants to impeach a judge that won’t throw the constitution in the trash, this country is lost, to many lazy ass people want handouts and keep voting for losers that promise them things they can’t deliver, I hope I’m alive to see them crawling in the streets in what is surely going to become a 3rd world hell hole, that is, the former USA ...
fire someone for going their job , that’s the Obama Admin alright ,they have get the house to go along ,ah nope
I agree with the article, we need to impeach a supreme court judge, but that would be Judge Sotomeyer for not recusing herself because she was solicitor general and intimately involved in Obammy care.
IMHO they should be impeached if they do NOT overturn Obamacare,
Where was this clown after Kelo?
Beware when you gore the liberal’s ox (while they repeatedly stab conservative’s ox’s).
This is only an Obama supporter spouting off. I can’t imagine Obama himself calling for such a thing. It would probably backfire.
Also, Scalia would have a field day during the impeachment testimony.
Those who CAN’T, Teach.
“I agree with him that impeachment of justices is itself constitutional — but what constitutional principles, exactly, would the Supreme Court be undermining if they vote against Obamacare?”
The real question is what Constitutional printable would there be left to uphold if they did not vote against Obamacare?
What Constitution can exist that says government may do whatever it likes either directly or indirectly thou individual mandates?
“I agree with him that impeachment of justices is itself constitutional — but what constitutional principles, exactly, would the Supreme Court be undermining if they vote against Obamacare?”
The real question is what Constitutional printable would there be left to uphold if they did not vote against Obamacare?
What Constitution can exist that says government may do whatever it likes either directly or indirectly thou individual mandates?
From the article: “Dow’s argument that the individual mandate is constitutional is exactly what you would expect: If you are going to voluntarily do something (e.g. drive a car), the government can make you purchase a product (e.g. insurance) provided it has a good reason for doing so (e.g. making sure you can pay for any damage you do).”
I am sick to death of hearing this ridiculous auto insurance analogy. It is a pathetically stupid comparison, and has NO validity in the case of health insurance.
First, auto insurance is mandated at the STATE level, not the Federal.
Second, in most states you can self insure by merely posting a sufficient surety bond with the state.
Using this argument, the pubbies are continuing to let the libs CONTROL THE LANGUAGE OF THE DISCUSSION. The libs have been wildly successful scoring points with the uninformed electorate in almost every case where that has been true.
Force the argument back to the correct Constitutional confines. If SCOTUS allows this patently offensive law to stand, based on a twisted interpretation of the commerce clause, they should be impeached. If the whole of the PPACA is NOT struck down, they should be impeached.
David R. Dow is professor of law at the University of Houston Law Center and an internationally recognized figure in the fight against the death penalty. He is the founder and director of the Texas Innocence. He lives in Houston, Texas.
In other words, Dow is an Obama loon.
38 States, a whopping 76% want out of the mandate and this dink thinks the SCJ who overturn it should be impeached? “All about me and what I want” has overtaken the rule of law/constitutionality.
Must be a leak -
The dummycRATS are working themselves into a lather with months to go before the decision is announced to the public.
So Univ of Houston and Rice pay idiots to pretend to be intellectuals.
Bad showing Texas.
And the likelihood of doing this in the House, Herr Professor Dork, is......?