[liberalh8ter]

Then we keep going down this road. Why bother to take an oath if there's no penalty for violating it? Do you suppose the founders would believe a legislator should be allowed to continue to hold office if he has drafted and passed legislation In direct violation of the Constitution?Is unconstitutional legislation not a glaring indicator of complete incompetence?

My comment was not to say they should be arrested and I don't desire us to be a banana republic however, there should be a penalty for violating the oath of office; especially for violating our governing charter.

[allmendream]

The penalty should be enacted at the ballot box.

If a legislator votes for a law that the SCOTUS strikes down as Unconstitutional - the people who elect that legislator should take a long hard look at his philosophy of governance and see if it is compatible with their own views before voting to reelect.

It is not a case that the legislator KNOWINGLY violated their oath. It is up to the SCOTUS to rule on the LAW - not the legislators who passed the law. A 5-4 decision by the SCOTUS should not engender criminal liability for those whose view agreed with only four of the nine SCOTUS judges.

Should a 5-4 decision by the SCOTUS mean criminal liability for the four Justices who agreed with a law that according to the other five was “violating our governing charter”?

Should there only be penalties for legislators who voted for a law that all NINE SCOTUS judges ruled was unconstitutional? Eight or Seven out of Nine? Six out of nine? Five out of nine?

Should questions over the Constitutionality of a law devolve into questions of who gets penalized and to what degree - or is it OK for the SCOTUS to rule on the law - not the legislature?