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

Skip to comments.

Impeach Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
The Washington Times ^ | 10-20-03 | Greg Pierce

Posted on 11/04/2003 4:25:10 PM PST by auggy

Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor aborts the U.S. Constitution; impeachable offense? In an unprecedented show of arrogance against America and the United States Constitution, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said in a speech that she and her colleagues on the Supreme Court are going to increasingly rely on international law rather than looking to the U.S. Constitution , Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said in a speech that she and her colleagues on the Supreme Court are going to increasingly rely on international law rather than looking to the U.S. Constitution as they make their decisions. Disregarding her oath of office that she will uphold the U.S. Constitution seems to be an impeachable offense. In the infamous "Lawrence v. Texas" sodomy case this year, Mrs. O'Connor said the majority on the court used European legal precedent in making their rogue decision. And worse yet, she said that "Over time, we will rely increasingly on international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues." The Christian Coalition of America calls on Congress to begin reining in these arrogant renegade judges, and dealing with Justice O'Connor would be a good place to begin.

(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: aborts; arrogance; constitution; courts; foreign; impeach; impeachscotus; oconnor; transjudicialism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-117 next last
I for one, will not allow this treasonous woman to crap on our constitution and still keep her title as Supreme Court Justice. Below is a letter I found, which ,says exactly what I feel. This would be a good letter to send to your politicians. Please, freepers, this has got to end. It is high time we make an example out of these elitists.

Let's ALL write to our representitives and start removing these communists, while we still can.

Dear Sirs; I was appalled & angered at what I just learned regarding the comments of Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Conner. In a recent speech she arrogantly stated that she and her colleagues were going to increasingly depend on international laws and foreign courts to interpret domestic issues instead of the U.S. Constitution in which she is obligated to uphold.

It is my understanding that anyone holding a federally elected or appointed position is required to uphold the Constitution of the United States. It is my strong persuasion that anyone who would purposely undermine the U.S. Constitution is manifesting an unpatriotic attitude towards our "beloved county" that is founded on that very Constitution. Please help initiate proceedings of impeachment upon your findings of investigation.

I am requesting that you begin an immediate investigation into Mrs. Sandra Day O'Conner and her violation of her oath of office as Supreme Court Justice. I would also request an investigation of her court decisions as well as the decisions of her colleagues.

I, for one, will not stand by and see this country surrender its sovereignty. I am just one of many "grass-root" voters who intend to do something about it.

Below is a link to email your representitives.

http://congress.nw.dc.us/townhall/home/

1 posted on 11/04/2003 4:25:13 PM PST by auggy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: auggy
I agree that a Supreme Court justice who says she will rely on contemporary international law rather than American constitutional law should be impeached. This is nothing less than abrogating the Constitution.
2 posted on 11/04/2003 4:28:31 PM PST by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Let's go Freeper's!

Isn't this what we are all about?
3 posted on 11/04/2003 4:35:25 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Her remarks border on treason. The problem is to get enough House members to actually draw up Articles of Impeachment; being cowards, I don't see that happening. Even if the House had the guts to do it, the US Senate, with its "majority" of RAT-bastards + 5 RINOs would never vote to convict. Still, the idea has merit.
4 posted on 11/04/2003 4:35:26 PM PST by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
I know my congressman won't get into this. Her sister is a prominent pol in this area.
5 posted on 11/04/2003 4:39:07 PM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
"I agree that a Supreme Court justice who says she will rely on contemporary international law rather than American constitutional law should be impeached. This is nothing less than abrogating the Constitution"

I hope I can depend on you to ,"copy & paste", or write your own letter to your representitives.

I takes very little time.

6 posted on 11/04/2003 4:39:39 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Here are just a FEW articles converning the Treasonous SCOTUS justices:

'Literalism must be avoided because there is no surer way to misread any document than to read it literally.'

"If you do it right, you people here will become law clerks and the law clerks will become judges and the assistant secretaries and YOU'LL RUN THE WORLD."

We no longer live in a Constitutional Republic

Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer: U. S. Constitution should be subordinated to international will

Impeach the U.S. Supreme Court

.
7 posted on 11/04/2003 4:39:47 PM PST by steplock (www.FOCUS.GOHOTSPRINGS.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Maybe we have to wait until she (or other members) actually DO RELY on international law.....??? Yeah, her statement is BAD, but have any of her actions exhibited this relying on others laws?
8 posted on 11/04/2003 4:39:53 PM PST by goodnesswins (Free people are not equal. Equal people are not free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
She needs to be impeached as do any other justices that admit to agreeing with her statement.
9 posted on 11/04/2003 4:41:22 PM PST by HennepinPrisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steplock
Thanks, for the links.
10 posted on 11/04/2003 4:42:39 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Like I said on another thread when this news came out.... She's lost her marbles.
11 posted on 11/04/2003 4:45:45 PM PST by b4its2late (Strip Mining Prevents Forest Fires)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
"Maybe we have to wait until she (or other members) actually DO RELY on international law.....??? Yeah, her statement is BAD, but have any of her actions exhibited this relying on others laws?"

The first cited case was decided in 2002 when the Supreme Court found it unconstitutional to execute the mentally retarded, she said. In arriving at that decision, Justice O'Connor said, the high court noted that the world community overwhelmingly disapproved of the practice. Also influential was a court brief filed by American diplomats who discussed the difficulties confronted in their foreign missions due to U.S. death-penalty practices, she said. The second ruling cited by Justice O'Connor was the striking down of the Texas antisodomy law, relying partly on a series of decisions by European courts on the same issue.

"I suspect," Justice O'Connor said, "that over time we will rely increasingly — or take notice, at least — increasingly on international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues."

Enough, said?

12 posted on 11/04/2003 4:48:51 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: auggy
The problem is that O'Connor isn't the only one who thinks this way - Breyer does too. This kind of thinking mainly poses a threat to the 2nd Amendment; private ownership of guns is under attack worldwide.
14 posted on 11/04/2003 4:50:12 PM PST by Steve_Seattle ("Above all, shake your bum at Burton.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: b4its2late
"Like I said on another thread when this news came out.... She's lost her marbles."

Like Rush says,"Words mean things". Whether she is crazy or not, she should be taken down.

15 posted on 11/04/2003 4:52:57 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
"The problem is that O'Connor isn't the only one who thinks this way - Breyer does too. This kind of thinking mainly poses a threat to the 2nd Amendment; private ownership of guns is under attack worldwide."

That's right. Are we going to allow this to happen?

O'Connor is a good one to start with, the others will come later.

Just because she isn't the only one that thinks this way, shouldn't mean we just let them do what they want.

Dammit we have to start somewhere.

16 posted on 11/04/2003 4:58:03 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: skull stomper
Copy & Paste. It really only takes a minute.
17 posted on 11/04/2003 4:59:21 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: HennepinPrisoner
"She needs to be impeached as do any other justices that admit to agreeing with her statement."

Thank You!

Let's do it.

18 posted on 11/04/2003 5:01:26 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: auggy
I'm in.

I'll write my rep, Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles), but we all know she'll put it her File 13.

19 posted on 11/04/2003 5:15:11 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
I wrote 'em all.
Thanks.
Freedom is not free, but email makes it close.
We nuked CBS!
Congrats Freepers!!
20 posted on 11/04/2003 5:15:49 PM PST by Senormechanico ("Face piles of trials with smiles...it riles them to believe that you perceive the web they weave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
I will get on board this 1, come ooooooon Freeper's this must stop lets make a stand on this 1.
21 posted on 11/04/2003 5:25:08 PM PST by Phyto Chems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Can you post a copy of her speech?
22 posted on 11/04/2003 5:30:14 PM PST by thiscouldbemoreconfusing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #23 Removed by Moderator

To: auggy
I'm in.
24 posted on 11/04/2003 5:41:23 PM PST by MonroeDNA (Please become a monthly donor!!! Just $3 a month--you won't miss it, and will feel proud!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy; All
I think Ruth Bader Ginsburg was the first to refer to the "international law" as a guideline a year or two ago....she's an ex-ACLU attorney.
25 posted on 11/04/2003 6:28:11 PM PST by cfrels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: MonroeDNA
Thanks! Let's go Freeper's.
26 posted on 11/04/2003 7:07:41 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: skull stomper
Thank you!
We have to try.
27 posted on 11/04/2003 7:09:07 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: thiscouldbemoreconfusing
"Can you post a copy of her speech? "

I will see, if I can find it.

28 posted on 11/04/2003 7:10:43 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Phyto Chems
Thanks Phyto!
It can be done.
29 posted on 11/04/2003 7:11:58 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Senormechanico
Thank You Senormechanico.
Are you a automotive mechanico?
I am a autobody mechanico. lol
really
30 posted on 11/04/2003 7:14:04 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
"I'll write my rep, Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles), but we all know she'll put it her File 13."

Maybe, just maybe, she will get enough emails that she will, at least, take notice.

I don't expect a demon to do anything, but at least, they will know we are pi$$ed

31 posted on 11/04/2003 7:17:48 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Comment #32 Removed by Moderator

To: auggy
If you do, could you ping me and e-mail it to me at:

doubting_didymus@yahoo.com

Thanks, sometimes I am unalbe to get oon a computer for weeks at a time, finding things pinged can be difficult, but my yahoo acct. keeps things until rapture.

33 posted on 11/05/2003 4:34:07 AM PST by thiscouldbemoreconfusing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 45Auto
Her remarks border on treason. The problem is to get enough House members to actually draw up Articles of Impeachment; being cowards, I don't see that happening. Even if the House had the guts to do it, the US Senate, with its "majority" of RAT-bastards + 5 RINOs would never vote to convict. Still, the idea has merit

Failed campaigns that result in their partisans being portrayed as kooks have no merit.

It took the socialist internationalists from 1912 to 1974 to gain their massive majorities in Congress.

They have been losing support and members since then, but they still have huge majorities in both Houses.

There are not 80 congressman or thirty senators on our side.

But, we are gaining and they are losing. If we are patient, elections can and will bring us to victory.

If you are not patient, foolish and premature direct action can only hurt us and lead you personally to your own private Waco.

Keep the faith.

34 posted on 11/05/2003 4:40:16 AM PST by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Ping!
35 posted on 11/05/2003 4:42:21 AM PST by Rummyfan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: goodnesswins
"Maybe we have to wait until she (or other members) actually DO RELY on international law.....??? Yeah, her statement is BAD, but have any of her actions exhibited this relying on others laws?"

See 'Lawrence v. Texas.' I shudder to think what O'Connor and her ilk will do vis-a-vis the Second Amendment.
36 posted on 11/05/2003 4:57:17 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Somebody needs to come up with a web site. Then funding for an advertising campaign.
37 posted on 11/05/2003 5:04:26 AM PST by Vision
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: auggy
I'm with you although I will write my own letter outlining the statements and actions by her and other members of the court that amount to treason against the Consitution and the people of the United States.
38 posted on 11/05/2003 5:33:48 AM PST by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: auggy
Are you going to go after Ginsberg and Breyer for the same sentiments?
39 posted on 11/05/2003 5:36:02 AM PST by Pan_Yans Wife (You may forget the one with whom you have laughed, but never the one with whom you have wept.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vision
"Somebody needs to come up with a web site. Then funding for an advertising campaign"

Hey, that's an excellent idea.

Wonder who that someone could be?

Vision?

I just read a Blonde joke and I am eager to tell it.

Why do blonde girls have bruises around their belly buttons?Because, blonde guys are not too smart, either.

40 posted on 11/05/2003 5:36:08 AM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: auggy; WillRain; Sweet_Sunflower29
Judicial Outrage Ping

If you want on or off this list, let me know...please....really...it's no trouble at all...

41 posted on 11/05/2003 5:36:35 AM PST by BSunday (I'm not the bad guy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert
Mine have simply stopped responding to me.
42 posted on 11/05/2003 5:37:53 AM PST by ItsOurTimeNow ("Forth now, and fear no darkness!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: skull stomper
"Rodger that brother, where there is life, there is hope. "

It is something that definitely needs to be done.

Thank You!

43 posted on 11/05/2003 5:42:17 AM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: auggy; Grampa Dave; MeeknMing
Bump & Ping
44 posted on 11/05/2003 8:36:57 AM PST by EdReform (Support Free Republic - Become a Monthly Donor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
You mean that snotty Kennedy kid, and that so-called "Republican" hippie?

45 posted on 11/05/2003 9:01:51 AM PST by DLfromthedesert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: DLfromthedesert
And Langevin, the liberal cripple.

But, yes. Heathens and losers, the whole stinking lot of 'em.
46 posted on 11/05/2003 10:07:11 AM PST by ItsOurTimeNow ("Forth now, and fear no darkness!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Comment #47 Removed by Moderator

To: rhughe13
Wow! I wish I had a congresscritter like him. I very rarely get any replies from my representitives. I think alot more of a politician when he replies, and the reply you got was very good. I wonder, if they had written a reply on this subject because they have had so many people writing about O'Connor?

What I gather from his remarks, is the Constitutions Article III states that when the person is a foreigner, the Justices need to consider the laws of his/her country or state. I don't think, from what he states, it means the citizens in our country. In fact, I would bet money, that it does not apply to the citizens of the U.S.A.

I am not a lawyer nor am I versed that much on the constitution, I am basing my opinion on the email you received from Rep. Mark Udall. Sandra Day O'Connor made it crystal clear that the reason for doing this was to make a better impression of the U.S. to the world. Which isn't the reason Article III was written.

Hopefully, they have been bombarded with emails, from people like you and I.

Thanks, for sharing it with us.

48 posted on 11/05/2003 1:24:51 PM PST by auggy (http://home.bellsouth.net/p/PWP-DownhomeKY /// Check out My USA Photo album & Fat Files)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: EdReform
Impeachment is too good for her ...

49 posted on 11/05/2003 1:28:29 PM PST by MeekOneGOP (Check out the Texas Chicken D 'RATS!: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/keyword/Redistricting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: auggy; JennieOsborne; /\XABN584; 10mm; 3D-JOY; 5Madman; <1/1,000,000th%; 11B3; 1Peter2:16; ...
I heard about this on the way to Fort Jackson this weekend... I immediately called my Congressman (Crenshaw (R-FL-4)) and spoke with his aide who followed up on it and verified exactly what it was that she said.... Now we need to spread the word... Please call YOUR congresscritter and INSIST that action be taken against "Justice" O'Connor...

ANY U.S. Supreme Court Justice who considers "International Law" when rendering decisions is not worthy to hold office in these United States!!!!

FReegards,

David C. Osborne

50 posted on 11/05/2003 3:31:28 PM PST by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-117 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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