Posted on 07/13/2016 3:27:29 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued
Judges, including SC ones, serve during ‘good behavior’. Grounds for impeachment were left purposely vague by the Founders, who regarded Congress as the most powerful branch of government and the judiciary as the weakest.
Certainly, Ginsburg's actions rise to that level.
She should apologize darth vader style.
I hear that you can tell when they are having an orgasm, they drop the book they were reading while having sex.
That’s a pretty good joke, I’ll have to remember it.
Wardaddy, thanks for the head’s up.
“Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”
Ginsburg expressed surprise, in a NYT interview, that Roe was decided on the basis of “women’s rights,” rather than on the desirability of killing certain kinds of people.
http://www.wnd.com/2009/07/103457/
How does the Court vote on issuing cert? If the conservative justices simply boycott until Ginsburg resigns, would they have a quorum to hear additional cases? It’s another way of pressuring the daft old bat to hang up her robe and retire to Shady Acres.
I believe any official can be impeached as unfit for the office. With Ginsburg so publicly displaying her bias, I believe a case could be made that that admission renders her incapable of objectivity, which is a requisite for her job. any lower court judge would be summarily recused if he demonstrated even a hint of such bias against a potential claimant. For example, if a district court judge proclaimed how much he despised Al Sharpton and a case came before his bench that involved Sharpton’s tax evasion, any ruling he handed down would be suspect. The defense could easily get a mistrial. So the judge would almost certainly recuse himself from the case.
Similarly, if President Trump’s solicitor general brought a petition before the Court, how could Ginsburg possibly represent herself as an objective arbiter?
And let’s not forget that, notwithstanding all his notoriety, Donald Trump is still an American citizen with a right to his day in court. What if he brought an action to the Court as a private citizen? It is clear Ginsburg could not render an impartial opinion on the matter.
She is unfit to hold the office and should be censured and removed immediately. We do not need bigots ruling on matters of law.
How long could you listen to Obama give a state of the disunion speech without either falling asleep or going into a rage?
Just to clarify: ‘Misdemeanor’ in the Constitution means ‘bad attitude ‘, not a crime. If the President decided to just go play golf for the rest of his term, he could be removed for that, if Congess so desired.
Similarly, ‘High Crimes’ means a crime by someone of high position, most specifically those at a level where enforcement positions are made, or where special powers exist. The ‘High’ part has to do with the position of the person carrying out the crime/act, not the severity of the act.
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.