Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should John Roberts be impeached?

Posted on 07/02/2012 7:40:05 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing

Simple enough question. We need to start using this option.

He clearly brought the country closer to tyranny, and that in my view is an impeachable offense. Outside of "my view", his job is to uphold the constitution.

He failed to do his job. He failed to protect the people. He failed to protect COTUS.

He should be fired.


TOPICS: Chit/Chat
KEYWORDS: abortion; deathpanels; impeachment; johnroberts; judiciary; obamacare; scotus; zerocare
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-102 next last

1 posted on 07/02/2012 7:40:23 PM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

No.


2 posted on 07/02/2012 7:41:20 PM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network (America doesn't need any new laws. America needs freedom!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Every time he is seen in public, it should be loudly suggested that he resign.


3 posted on 07/02/2012 7:42:32 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Ginsburg is far, far worse. Why wouldn’t you start with her?


4 posted on 07/02/2012 7:45:28 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

With an extreme liberal in the white house, and a democrat majority in the senate?

All of this impeachment talk is madness


5 posted on 07/02/2012 7:45:55 PM PDT by JohnBrowdie (http://forum.stink-eye.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2
I remember the Impeach Warren move- wasn't right then - not right now.
6 posted on 07/02/2012 7:46:37 PM PDT by lag along
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

No.

It just leads to Obama or Romney getting one more shot at making things worse.


7 posted on 07/02/2012 7:46:37 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Sure, but only if we’re going to impeach the other commies too.


8 posted on 07/02/2012 7:47:44 PM PDT by RaisingCain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

I’m of the opinion that if Obama is defeated in November because of Obamacare, John Roberts may have saved the country at the cost of his own reputation during his lifetime, and history will recognize him as one of the greatest of patriots.


9 posted on 07/02/2012 7:50:50 PM PDT by ExpatCanuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss

Agreed. Start with RBG.


10 posted on 07/02/2012 7:50:59 PM PDT by jmstein7 (A Judge not bound by the original meaning of the Constitution interprets nothing but his own mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
At the very least, a Congressional investigation should be launch to determine if there was an ulterior motive behind Roberts changing his position. From that outcome, the need for further action could be determined.
11 posted on 07/02/2012 7:51:08 PM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

No


12 posted on 07/02/2012 7:52:18 PM PDT by montanajoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
No.

Samuel Chase was impeached and aquitted. Mostly, even his most ardent critics in the Senate refused to convict him on the grounds of decision quality.

Obamacare, if replaced and repealed, must be (at this point) handled through the Legislative Branch, then signed by a new President. Even if this House (which I doubt would occur) drew up articles against him, it would only hurt them and make them look like sore losers.

IMO, any attempt to impeach him on these grounds would assure Dem retention of the Senate and introduce the real potential of House loss again, giving us Speaker Pelosi Part Deux. The outcome of the Presidental election, at that point, would be irrelevant.

13 posted on 07/02/2012 7:53:02 PM PDT by edpc (Wilby 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: ExpatCanuck

I think he may have done more good than harm whether it was his intent or not.


15 posted on 07/02/2012 7:53:26 PM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

No!

There seems to be a silver lining in what Roberts actually did. I don’t think he did this to benefit Obamacare at all. I think he realized that if he threw it out, the democrats were going to push harder to get this legislation passed. What Roberts did was left it to the states.

Look at what the states are doing.... Many are not going to abide by it. The House is ready to bring it back to the House and repeal it as now it is a tax and not a penalty. They will have many democrats on their side since many are up for re-election. I think we need to just watch this! He also gave the government in no uncertain terms that they were not allowed to use the commerce clause in this manner - its a flat out tax. This makes Obama a liar in chief. This is payback time for Roberts.

He thought long and hard about this decision - lets give it time to fully sink in. I don’t think we should be going for his head at this time. He may have just saved us.

I have pretty strong feelings about this. There is something there that he did that definitely was not in BO’s favor.


16 posted on 07/02/2012 7:54:00 PM PDT by jcsjcm (This country was built on exceptionalism and individualism. In God we Trust - Laus Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

“We.need to start using this option”

If you had a Congress that would impeach Roberts it wouldn’t be necessary.

As it is, you are about 50-60 Senators short.

If it makes you feel better, dream on.


17 posted on 07/02/2012 7:54:20 PM PDT by Jim Noble (Anna Wintour makes Teresa Heinz Kerry look like Dolly Parton.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
No grounds for impeachment.

Remember Roberts was one of five votes... and he changed his mind to make the wrong choice half-hearted. What about the other four full blown socialists that were a solid vote? What about Stephen Breyer, the Wise Latina, The Lady's Man Kagan, and Darth Vader Ginsburg? They will vote for the USAs destruction every time. If you can impeach Roberts for damaging the Constitution you can do the same to them.

18 posted on 07/02/2012 7:55:50 PM PDT by GregoTX (Federalist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Unless it can be proven Roberts sold his vote for money or some other favor any talk of impeachment is a waste of time. As others have said with Obama in the WH any replacement would be far worse. Not liking the decision is not any sort of reason to impeach, and the argument that he subverted the Constitution is moot because the Constituion has, since Marbury, been whatever the Court says it is.


19 posted on 07/02/2012 7:56:04 PM PDT by xkaydet65
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

There isn’t a provision for impeaching or firing SCOTUS members.


20 posted on 07/02/2012 7:57:58 PM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lag along

My point is that Roberts has screwed the pooch with his “Can we all get along” approach and needs to be constantly reminded that his Chief Justiceship is now an Epic Fail.


21 posted on 07/02/2012 7:57:58 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

No. Let’s stop coming up with silly options.


22 posted on 07/02/2012 7:59:20 PM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing
And give Obama a chance to appoint a replacement?

Gee, I hope we can get someone MORE conservative from Obama, don't you?

23 posted on 07/02/2012 7:59:52 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

So Obama can replace him?


24 posted on 07/02/2012 8:00:10 PM PDT by NoLibZone (We must get down on our knees each day and thank God that McCain/Palin didn't win in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Definitely yes, but let’s wait until we have a Republican POTUS.

Roberts has shown himself to be of low moral character, and unfit to hold public office.


25 posted on 07/02/2012 8:00:51 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExpatCanuck

LOL! Court Jester Roberts is no patriot, he is a traitor and sold his soul and our liberty so he could be liked by liberals. His decision is a disaster for America and freedom for a long long time, possible forever. I would rather he rejected obamacare and upheld freedom, and Obama be re-elected, than have the monstrosity he foisted upon us.

You heard McConnell, they are going to wimp out. They are going to find a way to not repeal dickheadcare. They are wimpering castrati, they only care about their f***king careers and sticking it to us, and being exempted for dickheadcare.

Roberts screwed the pooch and America. I hope he is satisfied.


26 posted on 07/02/2012 8:01:12 PM PDT by HerrBlucher ( Romney blows with the political winds, Obama just blows.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
I think he may have done more good than harm whether it was his intent or not.

Indeed, but that is my point. He is not a stupid man and I believe that he did more good than harm intentionally.

27 posted on 07/02/2012 8:01:52 PM PDT by ExpatCanuck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

Oh, yeah, the “silver lining”, or as they say, received ideas (Krauthammer, Will, et al. Yawn!) And Mr Roberts was so devilishly clever that he fooled those 4 liberals on the court, and they still don’t know better and will never know what hit ‘em.


28 posted on 07/02/2012 8:03:31 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss

No, Ginsburg is not worse; she has never pretended to be anything but what she is. We disagree with her idiologically, but that is not an impeachable offense.

Roberts is dishonest, and devoid of character.


29 posted on 07/02/2012 8:03:41 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Therefore the need for an investigate to determine if Roberts was blackmailed or coerced into changing his vote.

If he was, I'm not sure what that would mean for him or the final SC decision on Obamacare.

30 posted on 07/02/2012 8:03:48 PM PDT by Errant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing; All

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States of America should quickly and voluntarily submit to an Impeachment Trial to clear the integrity and good name of the Supreme Court.

If found guilty, the Chief Justice should have swift and severe Justice.

If he is found not guilty, then there will be hell to pay as every Federal Judge in the Federal Court System will legislate all cases brought before them in any manner that they see fit.

The polarization of America will then be complete, with the Supreme Court being the last of the major Federal Branches of Government to fall to the European Feudal/Socialist System of Slavery.

BTW, read my tag line for the correct legal opinion on this topic.


31 posted on 07/02/2012 8:05:04 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Traitor John Roberts' Obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND the U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lag along

Earl Warren was very impeachable, but the congress was solidly communist at the time, so it went nowhere.


32 posted on 07/02/2012 8:05:27 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Just got home from work...obligitory shower took and beer drank...ping me tomorrow, as I gotta few opinions on yer subject...g’night.


33 posted on 07/02/2012 8:06:31 PM PDT by SgtBob (Freedom is not for the faint of heart. Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring
Yes, there is.
A SCOTUS member can be impeached.
Not a very good idea in this case, but it can be done.

I think KAGAN should be impeached for failure to recuse herself, but not until Romney can name her replacement.

34 posted on 07/02/2012 8:07:09 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

It’s a silly academic question, since you know very well he will not be impeached over this or over anything else.


35 posted on 07/02/2012 8:08:25 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Definitely yes, but let’s wait until we have a Republican POTUS.

Roberts has shown himself to be of low moral character, and unfit to hold public office.

Roberts was appointed by a Republican POTUS. Maybe we should wait for a conservative POTUS. The odds on Romney being such a POTUS aren't good.

36 posted on 07/02/2012 8:09:04 PM PDT by slowhandluke (It's hard to be cynical enough in this age.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

>> “There isn’t a provision for impeaching or firing SCOTUS members.” <<

.
A truly idiotic comment!

They’re impeachable for the same causes as any other official, plus one more: Immorality.


37 posted on 07/02/2012 8:09:36 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

well...another thought...he should resign??? and the supreme court should disolve...why? because chief justice roberts, in my mind, seems to prefer the voters to make decisions, he explained he felt the need to defer to the masses/voters (lord help us)...so should the voters then decide all issues???? if so, where does the supreme court come into play?

roberts indicates they are irrelevant???


38 posted on 07/02/2012 8:11:06 PM PDT by formoversubstance (formoversubstance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
IMO, Roberts made a huge mistake - he tried to outplay the Left at their own game when he should have voted to make their game illegal. Roberts should have considered that Adolf Hitler's rise to totalitarian power in Weimer Germany was almost entirely 'legal', bolstered by weak kneed actions such as Roberts' in his 0bamacare vote.

Instead, Roberts tried to make the Left's case for them in a way that he thought was slightly compatible with conservative ideals. Problem is, the Left is composed almost entirely of such unscrupulous liars and revisionists that they shouldn't have much trouble obscuring or otherwise getting around the fact that 0bamacare is primarily a government power grab pack of tax increases which they are fundamentally for, anyway.

39 posted on 07/02/2012 8:12:01 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Leftists give insanity a bad name. 0bama: Four years of failure and fingerpointing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
IMO, Roberts made a huge mistake - he tried to outplay the Left at their own game when he should have voted to make their game illegal. Roberts should have considered that Adolf Hitler's rise to totalitarian power in Weimer Germany was almost entirely 'legal', bolstered by weak kneed actions such as Roberts' in his 0bamacare vote.

Instead, Roberts tried to make the Left's case for them in a way that he thought was slightly compatible with conservative ideals. Problem is, the Left is composed almost entirely of such unscrupulous liars and revisionists that they shouldn't have much trouble obscuring or otherwise getting around the fact that 0bamacare is primarily a government power grab pack of tax increases which they are fundamentally for, anyway.

40 posted on 07/02/2012 8:12:26 PM PDT by Post Toasties (Leftists give insanity a bad name. 0bama: Four years of failure and fingerpointing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

Of course he should be, but it will not happen. There have been worse than him on the bench. Think the idiots that found the way to make murder by abortion constitutional.


41 posted on 07/02/2012 8:13:06 PM PDT by formosa (Formosa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: slowhandluke

We’ll all be dead by then.


42 posted on 07/02/2012 8:13:19 PM PDT by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they were.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58; mnehring

It can be and has been done.


43 posted on 07/02/2012 8:13:37 PM PDT by edpc (Wilby 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

Romney, if he had a hair on his ass, would say he would call for Roberts resignation the first day of his presidency and put in his place a staunch conservative.


44 posted on 07/02/2012 8:13:54 PM PDT by Texas Songwriter (Ia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
There seems to be a silver lining in what Roberts actually did. I don’t think he did this to benefit Obamacare at all. I think he realized that if he threw it out, the democrats were going to push harder to get this legislation passed. What Roberts did was left it to the states.

So he deserves credit for upholding an unconstitutional bill by concocting a convoluted opinion that was so tortured and absurd that Justices Alito, Kennedy, Thomas and Scalia declined to sign it?

I don't think so.

45 posted on 07/02/2012 8:15:33 PM PDT by BlatherNaut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

“There isn’t a provision for impeaching or firing SCOTUS members.”

I think you’re misinformed?

From the constitution:

“The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior...]

Not a very high bar really. Removal would follow standard impeachment proceedings. For lower courts, the congress could eliminate them altogether, or reduce their jurisdictional reach at will. Providing the Senate and the President went along.

To be clear, I’m not advocating impeachment.


46 posted on 07/02/2012 8:16:21 PM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Sure- it’s nice to get along.


47 posted on 07/02/2012 8:18:14 PM PDT by lag along
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: lag along

The dems have an impeached judge as a representive in the house. Old age causes me to forget his name...i’ll remember it later when it doesn’t matter...(oppps, just remember it Rep. Hastings.


48 posted on 07/02/2012 8:19:09 PM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

How do you impeach a judge?

That said: most people in DC loved this opinion - they’re not going to dump the guy who gave it to them.


49 posted on 07/02/2012 8:20:45 PM PDT by Tzimisce (THIS SUCKS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Halfmanhalfamazing

No way. At least not until Barack Obama is out of office. Why give him (Obama) another chance to nominate yet another ultra-liberal SC justice?


50 posted on 07/02/2012 8:21:17 PM PDT by Jess Kitting
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson