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

To: RandFan
I posted this on July 11, in a thread titled Senate Democrats announce vote to advance Supreme Court ethics bill:


The bill would give the court 180 days to adopt and publish a code of conduct, allowing the public to submit ethics complaints that a randomly selected panel of lower court judges would review.

This is clearly unconstitutional. The Supremacy clause says that the Supreme Court is Supreme law of the land. Lower court judges cannot be given any power or authority over the behavior of Supreme Court Justices. It is supposed to be the other way around.

Can one imagine the chaos that would ensue if the Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling, and then activists file a phony ethics charge against a Justice and a judge from the overturned court sits on the ethics panel "reviewing" the complaint against the Justice?

There is current US Code law regarding recusal of Federal Justices and Judges (28 U.S. Code ยง 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge which states:

(a)Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(b)He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances...

However, it seems to me that the parts of the law regarding Justices of the Supreme Court are unenforceable due to separation of powers, short of impeachment.

This is just Democrat chest-thumping because they can't do anything to sway the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, short of trying to manufacture an open seat for Biden to fill.


-PJ
47 posted on 07/29/2023 9:03:24 AM PDT by Political Junkie Too ( * LAAP = Left-wing Activist Agitprop Press (formerly known as the MSM))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Political Junkie Too; RandFan
The Supremacy clause says that the Supreme Court is Supreme law of the land.

The Supremacy Clause does not mention the Supreme Court.

The Court interprets the law. The Court says what the law is. A Supreme Court opinion interpreting a statute law may be overturned by a new statute law. A Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution may by overturned by a new Supreme Court opinion or a constitutional amendment. When the Supreme Court issues an opinion about the Constitution, it decides what the words of the Constitution mean. It does not write amendents to the Constitution.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlevi

Art. 6, cl. 2 (The Supremacy Clause)

This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

- - - - -

This is just Democrat chest-thumping because they can't do anything to sway the conservative-leaning Supreme Court, short of trying to manufacture an open seat for Biden to fill.

The effort is actually to create four (4) new seats for Biden fill.

53 posted on 07/31/2023 8:48:41 AM PDT by woodpusher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | 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