I believe that Justice Thomas should be impeached for the implied ethics violations, even though he said these were gifts the optics of these say other wise.Correct. Term limits would need a Constitutional amendment.
On the other hand ethics laws that apply to the court would not. Ethics laws applicable to the courts simply become part of the United States Code and therefore a basis for impeachment.
WW
I believe that Justice Thomas should be impeached for the implied ethics violations, even though he said these were gifts the optics of these say other wise.
The decisions of the SCOTUS are not set in stone, Congress can over ride a Supreme Court decision by proposing new legislation that doesn't violate the Constitution.While watching MAGAs parroting liberals is entertaining, doesn't do much and just shows your own hypocrisy, again.
That said, when you have court justices that engaged in future planning to bring down a 50 year precedent, before they even get the seat, scratch out an immunity for the most powerful person in our nation, and are caught on tape acknowledging they're bias, something needs to be done. SC's authority isn't the end word, they still work for the people of this nation and the majority of people in this nation have serious suspicion of the SC and think they need shorter terms, and some accountability.
It's simply not going to be as easy as treating the SC like our parents and calling it a day. That's not their job.
I'm hoping dems sweep in 24' and pick up the house.The decisions of the SCOTUS are not set in stone, Congress can over ride a Supreme Court decision by proposing new legislation that doesn't violate the Constitution.
I think he got that with Trump v United States. There must be some other reason for him to want an enforceable ethics code for the Supreme Court.
How dare anyone question his thoughts and or policies, for if he doesn't get the decisions he wants he threatens them with stacking the court, now it's revamping the Judicial Branch. The Biden administration is an authoritarian oligarchy.
I believe that Justice Thomas should be impeached for the implied ethics violations, even though he said these were gifts the optics of these say other wise.
Optics are irrelevant.
People simply want him off SCOTUS because they don't agree with his rulings and votes, mostly because the SCOTUS remains "Republican appointee" dominant.
They tend to forget this was not always the case, and in those years when Democrats controlled SCOTUS they had no problems with racist rulings (as I pointed out in a prior post). I also pointed out that during the 4 Term period of FDR he would often use the THREAT of increasing the SCOTUS membership in order to compel "rulings" he wanted.
Forgive me for a slight correction. It is not "Biden" who wants "absolute power." He is a mentally and physically declining sock-puppet for the Democrat "leadership" to manipulate. He gets the blame, they get what they want.
But the Democrats have frequently been floating the idea of an expanded SCOTUS since as far back at least as Franklin Roosevelt. This in order to get control over that "co-equal Branch" in order to push their ongoing agendas.
Funny though, during a period when SCOTUS was mostly made up of Southern Democrat appointees, we had Dred Scott and Separate but Equal decisions in favor of racist ideology.
That's the deal with Democrats. It's their way or change the rules to get their way.
How do term limits on justices give Biden absolute power?
For once, I wish you all would just be honest.https://archive.is/HFdTP#selection-559.0-559.61
While I'm quite sure that are liberal friends and neighbors on this board will be all in for these changes, and likely more drastic ones, I would suggest that these proposed changes show an inclination from the left to effectively nullify the Constitution and implement a system of government without checks and balances. We would, if the Democrats get their way, end up with a system where the political parties hold all the power and the people hold none.
At what point in our history did Democrats decide that everyone that isn't a Democrat is an enemy of the nation and must be kneecapped so that the Democrat party can maintain, consolidate and expand their power?
You nailed it! If I might add.Optics are irrelevant.
Democrats simply want him off SCOTUS because they don't agree with his rulings and votes, mostly because the SCOTUS remains "Republican appointee" dominant. Doesn't matter that his written opinions are typically grounded in Constitutional law and also often in precedent, the Democrats need to get rid of him. SCOTUS is currently 6 Republican - 3 Democrat appointees.
Yet they tend to forget this was not always the case, and in those years when Democrats actually controlled SCOTUS they had no problems with racist rulings (as I pointed out in a prior post). I also pointed out that during the 4 Term period of FDR he would often use the THREAT of increasing the SCOTUS membership in order to compel "rulings" he wanted.
This is all a piece of the Democrat "PLAN" to make the USA a perpetual one-Party State. Everything that they have ever done has been geared toward that purpose. They have a history of election shenanigans from poll taxes, reading/writing tests, stuffing ballot boxes, etc. "By any means necessary."
From Packing to Sacking, Democrats Pledge Politics “By Any Means Necessary”
In the Age of Rage, no institution or process appears inviolate. When the majority of the Supreme Court shifted right, liberal academics and members demanded court packing — a practice long …jonathanturley.org
While I'm quite sure that are liberal friends and neighbors on this board will be all in for these changes, and likely more drastic ones, I would suggest that these proposed changes show an inclination from the left to effectively nullify the Constitution and implement a system of government without checks and balances.
Term limits is a cover for the "ethics" proposed, so they can impeach justices who do not tow party line in giving favorable decisions to the liberal left.
Not sure what you're getting at. I've taken issue with LOTS of SCOTUS rulings. At no point have I suggested packing the court or impeaching one of the justices. The court sometimes rules in a way I disagree with. Sometimes they rule in the way I prefer. I try to look at the decisions and where I see crap I say so. After that, life goes on.For once, I wish you all would just be honest.
In the past, you all screamed about activist judges, SC was fixed, everything needs to be changed, etc.
But when the court is packed with your guys, suddenly everything you failed against…is now fine and hunky dory and why would we change the system that we once demanded be changed?
Just be honest. You want it all your way, like spoiled brats.
Quit flip flopping and admit that you want only the GOP, conservatives, MAGA-mites in power and everyone else gets banned.
Just admit it. Be honest that you don’t want America, you just want all things your way.
Term limits is a cover for the "ethics" proposed, so they can impeach justices who do not tow party line in giving favorable decisions to the liberal left.
I'm not opposed to establishing term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code. Don't see why anyone would be against that. That's about the only changes that make sense are aren't done for purely political reasons.https://archive.is/HFdTP#selection-559.0-559.61
While I'm quite sure that are liberal friends and neighbors on this board will be all in for these changes, and likely more drastic ones, I would suggest that these proposed changes show an inclination from the left to effectively nullify the Constitution and implement a system of government without checks and balances. We would, if the Democrats get their way, end up with a system where the political parties hold all the power and the people hold none.
At what point in our history did Democrats decide that everyone that isn't a Democrat is an enemy of the nation and must be kneecapped so that the Democrat party can maintain, consolidate and expand their power?
Congress should have term limits as well.I agree, but would like to see civil asset forfeiture declared to be unconstitutional.
The irony of congress critters term limiting the POTUS (and perhaps the SCOTUS), yet not themselves is rich.
I believe that Justice Thomas should be impeached for the implied ethics violations, even though he said these were gifts the optics of these say other wise.
Oh, ha! They don't care about the facts. They presume guilty until proven innocent. Nancy P.'s rule, if you recall.You must PROVE that his input on decisions was affected by such "gifts." "Otherwise" a person is presumed INNOCENT until factually proven guilty.
Now I know that the LEFT thinks that simply by casting aspersions or slamming a negative label onto someone equates to being factual proof, but that's not how things actually work.
You must PROVE that his input on decisions was affected by such "gifts." "Otherwise" a person is presumed INNOCENT until factually proven guilty.
Libs are fascists at heart.https://archive.is/HFdTP#selection-559.0-559.61
While I'm quite sure that are liberal friends and neighbors on this board will be all in for these changes, and likely more drastic ones, I would suggest that these proposed changes show an inclination from the left to effectively nullify the Constitution and implement a system of government without checks and balances. We would, if the Democrats get their way, end up with a system where the political parties hold all the power and the people hold none.
At what point in our history did Democrats decide that everyone that isn't a Democrat is an enemy of the nation and must be kneecapped so that the Democrat party can maintain, consolidate and expand their power?
I'm not opposed to establishing term limits for the justices and an enforceable ethics code. Don't see why anyone would be against that. That's about the only changes that make sense are aren't done for purely political reasons.
Conviction of impeachment requires the House to approve by a majority and the Senate to convict with 2/3rds concurring.
There is no way an impeachment conviction occurs along a "party line".
WW
If he’s listening to the majority of the people he should bow out now. He’s groping at straws and pandering once again to the progressives. Elections do have consequences and this could set off a shit storm of tit for tat.Well, they've lost the support and trust of the majority of Americans. Can't say it's going to sit well, and Biden is suggesting only what the majority of people in this country has been asking for because that's his job.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?