If impeachment is too hard, how about a class action suit?

[cyberpj]

Lawyers jump on these class action suits all the time.

What if parents of military kids who died sued for wrongful death?

Since we went to war for WMD and there were none, isn't that an option now that an official report says there really were none?

If I were a parent of someone killed for this stupid excuse to raid the oil fields I'd consider suing.

Howzat sound?

PJ

[Karenca]

1. I'm not law-literate, but that sounds good to me...nt

[punpirate]

2. No go...

... enlistment contract says, essentially, go where we send you, and do what we tell you to do. Not defensible in court as wrongful death.

The responsibility for the decision lies with Congress, which allowed Bush to do what he pleased with the military via the war resolution. You would have to sue them. Good luck with that, very sad to say.

[Pacifist Patriot]

3. As attractive as I find the idea, I do believe...

there are laws that protect the administration from such civil action. A lawyer would have to chime in here to state for certain one way or the other.

Now a class action suit against the state of Ohio???????.....

[TwilightZone]

4. I may be wrong, but I think that people who sign up for the military

waive the right to sue the military for wrongful death. Accepted risk and such.

Besides, as you know, the "official" story of why we went to Iraq has changed. We don't buy it, of course, but it would likely be difficult to convince a judge or jury of that.

[euler]

5. The government is protected against lawsuit...

...in most cases. In any case, go here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_action_lawsuit


In the United States federal courts, class actions are governed by Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Class action lawsuits may be brought in Federal court if the case involves issues that affect potential class members in different states and has a nexus with federal law. However, such class action suits must have a certain equality of issues across state lines. This may be difficult as the civil law in the various states has significant differences and thus each state's set of claims may have to be handled separately or through the device of multi-district litigation (MDL). It is also possible to bring class action lawsuits under state law, and in some cases the court may extend its jurisdiction to all the members of the class both within the state and without (even internationally) as the key element is the jurisdiction that the court has over the defendant.

[leveymg]

6. Policymakers generally have immunity from law suits, particularly military

decisions. Sorry. Looked into this one after 9/11, and found that the courts not a promising avenue for redress. However, if Bush had lost, the Kerry Justice Dept. could certainly have pursued indictments for a whole host of crimes, ranging from 3,000 counts of negligent homicide for 9/11, to obstruction of justice for CIA obstruction of FBI investigations of al-Qaeda cells before the attacks, to violation of intelligence officer identity disclosure laws in Valerie Plame affair, to Abu Ghraib prison violations of US torture statutes.

Instead of prosecution for this, the legal masterminds, Gonzales and Chertoff, have been put in charge.

Alas, in Bush's America, law IS politics - that was also the working philosophy of Karl Schmidt, Hitler's chief judge.

[sickinohio]

7. I'm not a lawyer or anything - just a concerned citizen -

but, why can't we as US Citizens bring a class action law suit against Bu$hCo?? I'm sure with everything they have done, there should be something we can throw them in jail for!!!

[leveymg]

8. You'd Have to Get Past the Supreme Court to Sue Them. LOL

There's plenty that they could be thrown in jail for. The problem, however, is that the US justice system isn't sufficiently independent or powerful to enforce any sort of judgment that a federal or state court might conceivably hand down.

No Judge in her right mind is going to let such a case get past summary judgment. No prosecutor who wants to keep working would pursue a grand jury indictment of a seated President whose Party also controls Congress and the federal courts of appeal.

Nobody with a position to protect will even entertain a discussion of the subject. One used to think this sort of problem was symptomatic of a totalitarian regime. Now its our reality, and -- I agree -- the Dems need to start talking about it, while we still can.

[sickinohio]

9. Maybe they'll be thrown in jail for paying a "journalist",

with taxpayer money, to promote their agenda. I sure hope someone, somewhere is seriously working on all of the illegal activities of the Bu$hCo. I can't take another four years of these crooks.

[leveymg]

10. I'd put that allegation near the bottom of the Bill of Indictment

There are entire networks and newspaper chains that have a venal relationship with the Republican Party, and vis-a-versa.

Monkey see, monkey do, but don't tell the American people that.

[KaliTracy]

11. Too Hard? They tried to impeach a prez for private actions that have

nothing to do with National Security, National Stability, or Breaking International Law..... I would have thought that would have been "too hard" to do -- but incredulously, listened as they all voted....

[cyberpj]

12. But wasn't that a DEM president with a Repub congress?

They could go after him on anything because they had the numbers.

We don't.

[BR_Parkway]

13. Well, start with the voting machines. They were sold to us as

preventing all those earlier problems, undervotes and such. Now we have proof that they were faulty equipment, I want my money back! Besides, the discovery process could turn up all sorts of interesting stuff. Who knows, one of the Diebold or Sequoia stockholders might panic and spill all the beans if it looked like we were going to get refunds on faulty equipment and they had to pay back all that cash.

[Rebecca]

14. this sounds promising............