SCOTUS Roberts and Thomas impeachment hearings???

[White Eagle]

This is not a thread about Ginni Thomas or how the SCOTUS screwed over the American people, this is a thread about the possible impeachment of 2 members of SCOTUS.
Ginni Thomas' call to Anita Hill has brought up the possibility that Clarence lied to the Senate during his confirmation hearing, and Chief Justice John Roberts promised he wouldn't be a judicial activist during his Senate confirmation hearings. Again, another lie to the Senate.
Each article explains who is looking into impeachment proceedings for both members of SCOTUS. I hope they succeed.

http://www.alternet.org/story/148608/the_supreme_court_sold_out_our_democracy_--

_how_to_fight_the_corporate_takeover_of_our_elections?page=entire

This is lengthy. 7 pages of the original article.

Election 2010 is being fought on a wave of campaign dollars unleashed on the American people by the Supreme Court in its Citizens

United v. FEC decision. The court, led by a majority of staunch right-wingers, struck down limits on third-party “electioneering” ads

based on a tortured interpretation of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech.

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy...icemail-opens-thomases-to-criticism-ridicule/

Poor Ginni Thomas. All she wanted to do was get some closure–19 years later– by calling Anita Hill and asking the woman who was sexually harassed by Clarence Thomas to apologize. She didn’t get an apology, but it looks like she sparked a media firestorm instead, opening a couple of major cans of worms for her and her husband.

Both Thomases” have supremely bad judgement,” wrote Maureen Dowd in the Times this weekend, in one of dozens of high-profile pieces focusing on Ginni Thomas’s extreme politicking and her husband’s history of ethics problems — on top of his porn preferences.

And, yes, I know alternet is a left falling website. er, I mean leaning.

Ginni's link happened to have impeachment process website. I put it here for you. Altho, would this cover SOCTUS?

http://www.abanet.org/publiced/impeach2.html

FAQs and Web Resources on the Impeachment Process
Impeachment: A Look at the Process

Q. What is impeachment?
A. It is a process, authorized by the Constitution, to bring charges against certain officials of the federal government for misconduct while in office.

 

[rareboy]

Like this would ever happen.

 

[Knucklehead]

Like this would ever happen.

For real..This aint gonna happen. That would mean a Democrat would have to initiate it. Most Democrats have no stomach to offend the GOP..

 

[White Eagle]

For real..This aint gonna happen. That would mean a Democrat would have to initiate it. Most Democrats have no stomach to offend the GOP..

One can wish, can't one?

 

[White Eagle]

if misrepresenting yourself in a congressional hearing was a high crime, 90% of capital hill would be in jail.

hm... maybe you're on to something

anyways, in the history of our country, I don't believe a supreme court justice has ever been forced to step down from the bench. it's not going to happen just because the ruling party disagrees with a sitting justices judicial philosophy.

it's a dangerous precedent to set... how would you have felt if Bush tried to impeach every justice who voted against him in Bush v Gore?

Same as you.It wouldn't happen. But let's see what happens, ok?

 

[laikaNYC]

The one activist judge on the Supreme Court is Ruth Bader Ginsberg

 

[Seasoned]

All justices are activists from the standpoint of the opposing side, and they should be. They are the third branch of government in a trinity of equals. The problem occurs when they are political, not when they are active. Thomas is an embarassment.

 

[jackoroe]

You can impeach justices of the Supreme Court. It has in fact been done once in 1804. The Senate failed to convict and Justice Chase remained on the bench.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_a_US_Supreme_Court_justice_be_impeached_and_removed_from_office

 

[White Eagle]

You can impeach justices of the Supreme Court. It has in fact been done once in 1804. The Senate failed to convict and Justice Chase remained on the bench.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Can_a_US_Supreme_Court_justice_be_impeached_and_removed_from_office

Jack, you're knowledgeable on this subject, don't you think they are right by saying that these two lied to the Senate in their hearings?
Just curious.

 

[frankfrank]

One can wish, can't one?

At least the TITLE of the song fits...

 

[White Eagle]

Yeah, I think he is more screwed than the other. His wife sure fucked up.

 

[jackoroe]

Jack, you're knowledgeable on this subject, don't you think they are right by saying that these two lied to the Senate in their hearings?
Just curious.

Well, the statute of limitations on perjury is five years on the Federal level. So, I'm not sure they can make a criminal issue about Thomas. I agree, it's unseemly for a wife of a justice to be so politically active. Impeachment isn't a criminal proceeding, so I suppose that could go forward. I'm not real sure that some unknown women coming forward more than twenty years after his hearing are going to be persuasive. Maybe if they showed up during the hearings. I don't see this going anywhere, to be honest.

The Roberts issue is going to be about interpretation. He's going to simply contend that he isn't and the other side will say that he is. Is there compelling evidence or is it sour grapes? I think in all fairness that one is also a loser.

And the case you've cited as the genesis for this movement is interesting. I'm not a big fan of corporations handing out cash willy nilly. I've got issues with them being considered persons for certain purposes but not others. But I noticed an absence in the article of any mention of union money getting pumped into the election process. In fact, more union money than corporate money has been flowing yet no mention of that. I think that's interesting on another level.

 

[White Eagle]

That's why I think Thomas is more screwed. Is the money his wife gets contributed by someone with a case before the Court? We will never know cause they made sure we wouldn't find out.
This totally sucks!!!!!!!!!

 

[White Eagle]

BTW, I am not saying I know anything about this. Not as knowledgeable. But I do know how to spell.









along with spell check.

 

[rareboy]

does it matter?

Thomas is a reliable conservative vote. His wife is working for conservative organizations.

His wife taking money from them couldn't influence his vote when he'd be voting in their favor regardless.

I think that the fact that Thomas is likely to consistently vote for the conservative line does make the point moot. Like Alito and Roberts, he really loves the cause and isn't voting based on the money.

Having said that...I'd love nothing more than to have him caught in a lie.

 

[White Eagle]

Another is up for impeachment. Oregon Representative Peter DeFazio is investigating impeachment possibilities.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/155545/congressman-considers-move-impeach-chief-justice-john-roberts


Congressman Considers Move to Impeach Chief Justice John Roberts
John Nichols
October 25, 2010

Oregon Representative Peter DeFazio is an unbought and unbossed member of Congress—a true heir to the best tradition of another Oregon rabble-rouser, former Senator Wayne Morse—so it should come as no surprise that the maverick Democrat is responding with appropriate boldness to the flood of corporate cash that threatens to overwhelm the 2010 mid-term elections.

--snip--

So DeFazio is focusing on the real wrongdoer—the jurist who schemed to make it possible for shadowy players to warp the political process without identifying themselves.

Specifically, the congressman says, he is "investigating" the prospect of impeaching Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

Roberts, an ardent judicial activist, manipulated deliberations in the case of Citizens United v. FEC in order to create an opening for a sweeping 5–4 ruling that effectively eliminated limits on campaign spending by corporations. That decision helped create the current circumstance, where special-interest spending is shouting down the democratic discourse in states across the money.

Never one to back away from a fight, DeFazio is opening a discussion about whether it isn't time to hold Roberts to account.

"I mean, the Supreme Court has done a tremendous disservice to the United States of America," DeFazio told The Huffington Post last week. "They have done more to undermine our democracy with their Citizens United decision than all of the Republican operatives in the world in this campaign. They've opened the floodgates, and personally, I'm investigating articles of impeachment against Justice Roberts for perjuring during his Senate hearings, where he said he wouldn't be a judicial activist, and he wouldn't overturn precedents."

Loki81 says "Lied" is a little strong, but doesn't perjury mean lying?
I hope they can do something, even if it takes the rest of this decade.