Can Federal Judges Be Recalled? (ref: California 9th Circuit Court)

FairOpinion ^ | Sept. 15, 2003 | FairOpinion

[FairOpinion]

In CA they recalled Judge Rose Bird, who was on the CA Supreme Court in 1986.

So, obviously State judges can be recalled in CA.

Is there a law that would allow recall of Federal Judges?

If so, some of the Judges on the CA 9th Circuit Court really should be recalled.

Maybe we can get their recall elections scheduled for March too, right along with the Davis recall and kick them all out together.

[FairOpinion]

Thanks all of you for the answer.

Well, it's too bad we can't recall the judges.

No wonder the Dems are fighting so hard to stop Bush from putting in judges, who would actually respect the law.

The Dems have packed the courts with a bunch of liberal judges, who rule whichever way the Dems prefer.

I have another question.

We used the same punch card machines in November. If they were good enough in November, how come they aren't good enough now? This ruling is absolutely preposterous. Could that be an argument in the appeal of this decision?

How can it be appealed? I read a few posts, which said it can be requested that all 9th circ. judges hear it, not just the 3, who ruled and it can be appealed to the Supreme Court. Who does the appealing? CA State? What if they decide not to appeal, can the people appeal?

Does it have to be appealed to the full panel of judges first, before appealing it to the Supreme Court?

[jpl]

Hate to say it, but the Supreme Court opened the door on this one in Bush v. Gore. Now it seems federal court is the venue for state election disputes.

The Supreme Court had to get involved in the Florida dispute because the Florida Supreme Court violated the Equal Protection clause and Due Process clause of the U.S. Constitution, and as well all know state law cannot supersede federal law. Unfortunately, I believe that the Supremes will not get involved in this latest travesty from the Ninth however (the New Jersey Torricelli case seems to set a precedent there).

[princess leah]

Why ARE judges appointed and NOT elected? They seem to wield so much power and yet are not chosen by Joe Voter at all but by the party in power! This seems very wrong to me!

[CheneyChick]

they are supposed to interpret law

Which is something the 9th Circuit has historically been sh*tty in doing... based on the number of their decisions that have been overturned.

Hate to say it, but the Supreme Court opened the door on this one in Bush v. Gore.

Gore was the one who took it to the court (kangaroo) in the first place.

[RichInOC]

The high, or rather low, point for me was when Robert Alton Harris was about to be executed back in '92, the first guy since we reinstated the death penalty (after thirteen years in prison...not a moment too soon). The Ninth kept issuing stays to hear these habeas corpus writs on evidence the defense said hadn't been heard, some of which, like Harris supposedly might have had fetal-alcohol syndrome, probably couldn't have been because nobody would have known to look for it when he was on trial. Anyway, the Ninth kept sending up stuff like that, in one case staying the execution while they were prepping Harris for the gas chamber. And the Supremes kept knocking them down. And finally, the Supremes sent down notice that they would accept no further stays other than their own. In other words, "Enough. We know the case by heart by now. He's guilty. He earned the death penalty. Let it go."

[Common Tator]

You may recall that I was predicting that the 9th circuit court would take the case and throw a monkey wrench in the works.

You will notice what the 9th circuit court has done. It has declared the recall election unconstitutional as planned based on the Supreme court Decision made in the Bush-Gore case in 2000.

Note also that the 9th has not imposed a remedy. Thus the supreme court must over rule its basis for ruling for Bush in 2000 in order to rule against the 9th in this case. If the 9th had imposed a remedy the Supremes could overturn the remedy with out overturing the other issues.

This ploy puts the supremes in a strange place. They know that if they overrule the 9th they will be charged with rulling one way for Bush and the opposite way for Davis on the very same issue. The national media would have a fun time with that.

It will be interesting to see what happens. Perhaps the supremes will not take the case, but rule it will get in the game if the remedy does not suit them.

I think it is working out much like I predicted 2 months ago. That the 9th would fix it so Davis keeps his job.

Everybody and his lawyer told me there was no way and no issue that could be used to get the 9th in the game. Lots of people told me I was a fool when I said the recall would not work.... I may still look foolish, but not quite as foolish as I did two months ago.

It is exactly like what I always say. The law is whatever the judges say it is..

[KC_Conspirator]

They don't reflect the will of the people.

That is the best argument for impeaching them. If you look at the 9th Circus Court's record, you will find a long list of overturned cases. In on year they had 27 or 28 cases overturned by the Supreme Court. They clearly are not fit for public service and are wasting public funds.

[Heatseeker]

Perhaps there's another way. Constitutional Amendment requiring federal Judges to be elected. A long hard road though.

[livius]

Interesting analysis, thanks.

[FairOpinion]

"It has declared the recall election unconstitutional as planned based on the Supreme court Decision made in the Bush-Gore case in 2000."

===

Isn't that just the excuse? If voters get "disenfrenchised" because they had to use punch cards, then by the same token last November's election is invalid too, we used the same machines. So let's have another full election.

[justshutupandtakeit]

The answer is "NO." Federal judges can be impeached and removed (like Representative Alcee Hastings) by the House and the Senate

[Lurking Libertarian]

Note also that the 9th has not imposed a remedy.

They did-- they ordered the recall postponed to March 2004, which is when the State was previously scheduled to have replaced all the punchcard machines.

[jpl]

Your analysis is quite cogent. I have to give it to these liberals, they're getting more and more clever in their legal thievery. There is one thing though they may have forgotten to take into account though. The Democrats always argue in favor of "democracy" and the "will of the people". They will have to eventually permit a recall vote to go through, or else they will be exposed as the hypocrits that they are the next time they claim that "every vote should count".

[justshutupandtakeit]

Judges are not supposed to "represent the will of the People." That is the function of the legislative branch. The judiciary is NOT supposed to be filled with democratic functionairies.

Look at Cook County where the judges are RAT hacks elected by the People for a bad example. Bozo would be an improvement.

[Leatherneck_MT]

I'd go for that

[VU4G10]

RECALL ELECTION

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/09/15/state1319EDT0083.DTL

 

[CheneyChick]

Pregerson, Thomas and Paez. Appointed by Clinton and Carter....

[Lurking Libertarian]

Isn't that just the excuse? If voters get "disenfrenchised" because they had to use punch cards, then by the same token last November's election is invalid too, we used the same machines. So let's have another full election.

The rationale of the 9th Circuit decision was that it violates equal protection to use punchcards in some counties but not in others. (The State had previously agreed, in settling a prior lawsuit, to eliminate punchcard voting machines. This has already been done in some counties but won't be completed in all counties until March 2004.)

[justshutupandtakeit]

Actually the judiciary was set up specifically to resist democratic governance by the mob. It was designed to be independent so that decisions would be made on the basis of the Law rather than popular sentiment.

It is just the reflection of the popular view which makes this court so obnoxious. The "California view" is repugnant to most of the rest of the country.

[FairOpinion]

"Pregerson, Thomas and Paez. Appointed by Clinton and Carter.... "

===
What a surprise! NOT



Good picture!

I was waiting for someone to find the right picture. :)

(I tried, but couldn't find one in a reasonable time)