Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Do you think its time to impeach some Supreme Court justices?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Cicero Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:39 AM
Original message
Poll question: Do you think its time to impeach some Supreme Court justices?
For a majority of the Supreme Court to totally ignore the plain wording of the 5th Amendment and rule in favor of local governments turning into real estate agents for big developers, shows that they can no longer be trusted to uphold our Constitution. It is time for some of them to go.

What do you think?

Later,
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DistressedAmerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. Scalia, The Corrupt Duck Hunter!
Edited on Thu Jun-23-05 11:41 AM by DistressedAmerican
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. The Republicans are coming to take your house and land
An excellent good opportunity to trash rightwing judges as activists. This truly is an outrageous decision in favor of corporations and big money. The great thing is that is simple enough for almost everyone but the most lost koolaid drinkers to understand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MousePlayingDaffodil Donating Member (331 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. How do you figure . . .
. . . that this ruling was the work of the "rightwing judges" on the Supreme Court, when the four dissenters were Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, and Thomas? In this particular case, it was Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Bader-Ginsburg, and Breyer who came down on the side of "corporations and big money."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
billbuckhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #10
18. They're all rightwing compared Democrats
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
12. He should be because of his connections with Cheney and the conflict
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. Note: It Was the LIBERAL Judges who did this.
O'Connor, Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas were the dissenting justices.

So, who are ya gonna impeach?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
carnie_sf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
3. Antonin Scalia
and then let's go after Clarence Thomas
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
4. It's time for all of them to go.
They overstepped their bounds in Gore vs. Bush by annointing Bush president, didn't open Cheney's energy papers to the public, and now this ruling. They are plainly incompetent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullimiami Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
5. not re: this ruling.
but the original felonious 5 forsake their office, honor and duty and sold out for political ends.

that is corrupt and for that the 5 should be impeached.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldmund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. If the motive for suggesting this is this latest ruling...
...then I don't see how you can suggest to "impeach them all".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aintitfunny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
8. It was the good guys - the so-call liberal
judges who chose to do this. I expected as I read that it would be Scalia, Thomas, etc. I was shocked to find that our side ruled this way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pocket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. yeah, the rethugs dissented
and our guys made a bad, bad ruling
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
9. it's time for judicial term limits.
how 'bout that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrlandoGator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. That's my vote.
There should never be a lifetime term for anyone in government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
13. No. God No. Some people here sound like the right wing
What's next? Bitching about activist judges?

Hey! I know!

Lets abolish the Supreme Court altogether, and leave all the power and decision making to the WH and Legislative Branch.

Good idea!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cicero Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
14. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
15. 'If You Don't Like It, Get a New City Council'
Is what the majority opinion seemed to be saying, at least to my eyes.

I don't like it, but the constitution didn't stand in the way of this at any time in the past, so I'm not sure why it would/should now. They've allowed unreasonable seizures of accused, but not prosecuted, drug dealers, etc., for ages. How is this different.

We can't count on SCOTUS to bail us out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-23-05 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
17. You might want to read the decision
Edited on Thu Jun-23-05 12:22 PM by depakid
and consider the broader implictaions before going off half cocked.

That beoing said, you could certainly make a case for Scalia's impeachment- based on his contacts with Cheney during a pending case and also for his actions in Bush v. Gore.

An excellent case could alo be made angainst O'Connor, Thomas and Rhenquist for their actions in Bush v. Gore as well. It's more than the ruling (which some have equated to treason. Each of them should have recused themselves from the case due to onflicts of interests.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC