How to Remove Brett Kavanaugh

[calamity]

This is interesting.

The paper, “How To Remove a Federal Judge” by law professors Saikrishna Prakash and Steven D. Smith, lays out a road map for, well, how to remove a federal judge without resorting to the impeachment power. It argues that a provision of the Constitution stating that federal judges and justices “shall hold their offices during good behaviour” is widely misunderstood.

Contrary to the “virtually unquestioned assumption among constitutional law cognoscenti that impeachment is the only means of removing a federal judge,” Prakash and Smith argue that the term “good behavior” is a legal term of art that would have been understood by the founding generation to allow judges to be removed by “judicial process.”

How to remove Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh without impeachment - Vox

That should give us all something to chew on.

 

[Obscurity]

"During". I guess you missed that part? Kavanaugh was accused of doing this stuff forever ago. My sweet shadow, this is absurd.

FOCUS ON THE SENATE AND WH.

 

[Logical1]

Why would any intelligent want to remove a great judge.

Better yet get rid of Ginsburg. She is too old and sick to do her job right.

 

[bubbabgone]

"During". I guess you missed that part? Kavanaugh was accused of doing this stuff forever ago. My sweet shadow, this is absurd.

FOCUS ON THE SENATE AND WH.

 

[MrWonka]

"During". I guess you missed that part? Kavanaugh was accused of doing this stuff forever ago.

There was a massive pile of judicial ethics complaints that Kavanaugh was under investigation for when he was approved. They were thrown out by chief justice Roberts on the assumption that somehow being on the Supreme Court meant that those ethics investigations were no longer relevant.

What this article appears to be arguing is that those investigations should not have been thrown out. That Supreme Court Justices are not above the law and there may therefore be due cause to remove them without necessarily charging them with a crime or impeaching them. This may apply similarly to the way in which members of congress may be subject to ethics violations.

 

[3leftsdoo]

:roll:

 

[Obscurity]

There was a massive pile of judicial ethics complaints that Kavanaugh was under investigation for when he was approved. They were thrown out by chief justice Roberts on the assumption that somehow being on the Supreme Court meant that those ethics investigations were no longer relevant.

What this article appears to be arguing is that those investigations should not have been thrown out. That Supreme Court Justices are not above the law and there may therefore be due cause to remove them without necessarily charging them with a crime or impeaching them. This may apply similarly to the way in which members of congress may be subject to ethics violations.

1. I get it. I do. Kavanaugh, gorusch - stolen seats.

2. I don't care.

It's FAR more important to win the Senate and WH. The Scotus is bad; the lower courts even worse. Trump is appointing unqualified judges at breakneck speed and Mitch Mk**** is ramming them through ASAP.

The Senate and WH is far more important.

FOCUS ON THE ISSUES.

 

[MrWonka]

It's FAR more important to win the Senate and WH.

There is no reason both cannot be given the proper attention.

 

[Obscurity]

There is no reason both cannot be given the proper attention.

Yes, there is a reason: Independents do not enjoy this sort of grabass being played.

The MSM is -never- going to learn to appropriately report if every goddamned accusation is given an insane amount of coverage and outrage.

Senate. WH.

Do NOT let that slip away.

 

[Captain Adverse]

There was a massive pile of judicial ethics complaints that Kavanaugh was under investigation for when he was approved. They were thrown out by chief justice Roberts on the assumption that somehow being on the Supreme Court meant that those ethics investigations were no longer relevant.

What this article appears to be arguing is that those investigations should not have been thrown out. That Supreme Court Justices are not above the law and there may therefore be due cause to remove them without necessarily charging them with a crime or impeaching them. This may apply similarly to the way in which members of congress may be subject to ethics violations.

Hmm.. well since all "83 complaints" were raised as to "issues" during Kavanaugh's appointment hearings before the Congressional Committee...:

The Tenth Circuit Judicial Council consolidated the transferred complaints, pending complaints, and subsequently-filed complaints—83 in total—for purposes of review. Those complaints focus on Justice Kavanaugh’s conduct occurring during the September 27 confirmation hearing, as well as his testimony at prior confirmation hearings.1 They allege various violations of the Canons of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, as well as the standards of conduct set forth in the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act and the Rules for Judicial-Conduct and Judicial-Disability Proceedings for making inappropriately partisan statements and behaving in a demonstrably hostile manner during the hearings...

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/08/02/c.c.d._no._19-01_august_1_2019_0.pdf

...they seem to be "politically motivated" rather than factual issues of judicial misconduct while serving as a Judge of the Appellate or any other Court.

In any case, as Chief Justice Roberts is the supreme Justice for purposes of such review, he has the power to do exactly what he did; dismiss those "complaints" for the trash they were.

Meanwhile, it is true most judges can be removed for judicial misconduct, but in the case of SCOTUS, (and the examples used in the cited source materials of the article) criminal acts and "bad behavior" still seem to require impeachment. The standard is "high crimes and misdemeanors," and Congress decides what those entail.

 

[Lutherf]

This is interesting.



That should give us all something to chew on.

I sue hope you guys keep playing these games. It makes me feel better about 2020 every day.

 

[Obscurity]

Hmm.. well since all "83 complaints" were raised as to "issues" during Kavanaugh's appointment hearings before the Congressional Committee...:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/08/02/c.c.d._no._19-01_august_1_2019_0.pdf

...they seem to be "politically motivated" rather than factual issues of judicial misconduct while serving as a Judge of the Appellate or any other Court.

In any case, as Chief Justice Kennedy is the supreme Justice for purposes of such review, he has the power to do exactly what he did; dismiss those "complaints" for the trash they were.

Insisting they're trash and claiming they're politically motivated without any evidence is quite childish. At the end of the day it doesn't matter and your apparent dogpiling with the awful conservatives here has made me laugh at the majority of the stuff you post.

At the end of the day this is irrelevant. It's not worth injecting our effort into. But make no mistake, I will not brook folks like you spewing unsupported agitprop.

You know about as much as anyone else about the veracity of those claims, so spare us your inane nonsense.

 

[calamity]

Hmm.. well since all "83 complaints" were raised as to "issues" during Kavanaugh's appointment hearings before the Congressional Committee...:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/08/02/c.c.d._no._19-01_august_1_2019_0.pdf

...they seem to be "politically motivated" rather than factual issues of judicial misconduct while serving as a Judge of the Appellate or any other Court.

In any case, as Chief Justice Kennedy is the supreme Justice for purposes of such review, he has the power to do exactly what he did; dismiss those "complaints" for the trash they were.

Kennedy? :lamo

Was that Freudian, seeing how Kennedy’s sudden resignation, leading to Kav’s appointment, also appears to be one of judicial misconduct?

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

I don't understand this whole Kavanaugh madness. We have a conservative president he's going to appoint conservative judges. Even if you could remove Kavanaugh, they would just appoint someone else. Maybe someone worse. Kavanaugh is not the worst conservative judge out there from a liberal perspective.

 

[TurtleDude]

1. I get it. I do. Kavanaugh, gorusch - stolen seats.

2. I don't care.

It's FAR more important to win the Senate and WH. The Scotus is bad; the lower courts even worse. Trump is appointing unqualified judges at breakneck speed and Mitch Mk**** is ramming them through ASAP.

The Senate and WH is far more important.

FOCUS ON THE ISSUES.

who are the unqualified judges that Trump has appointed?

 

[Moon]

I don't understand this whole Kavanaugh madness. We have a conservative president he's going to appoint conservative judges. Even if you could remove Kavanaugh, they would just appoint someone else. Maybe someone worse. Kavanaugh is not the worst conservative judge out there from a liberal perspective.

Trump isn’t a conservative.

 

[tres borrachos]

I sue hope you guys keep playing these games. It makes me feel better about 2020 every day.

Feel better about the prospect of a pathological liar being re-elected?

 

[tres borrachos]

Kennedy? :lamo

Was that Freudian, seeing how Kennedy’s sudden resignation, leading to Kav’s appointment, also appears to be one of judicial misconduct?

That entire thing certainly was weird at best, suspicious at worst.

I say we focus on removing Trump from office and getting McConnell and the other Trump sycophants out of power so the decent people can retake the country from the mockery that is this administration.

And yes, I had to laugh at that post myself. That poster doesn't realize that not only is Kennedy gone - he was never Chief Justice to begin with. Trump Fan Nation....where the clueless live.

 

[Craig234]

Yes, there is a reason: Independents do not enjoy this sort of grabass being played.

The MSM is -never- going to learn to appropriately report if every goddamned accusation is given an insane amount of coverage and outrage.

Senate. WH.

Do NOT let that slip away.

The 'independents' who view the courts as unimportant 'grabass', don't really care about the Democrats taking the White House or Senate, either. We need to fight on the courts, also. Notice how hard Republicans are doing so, as they try to win on the White House, Senate, AND court - all three of which they currently have (and the courts they will for a long time to come)?

 

[Phys251]

"During". I guess you missed that part? Kavanaugh was accused of doing this stuff forever ago. My sweet shadow, this is absurd.

FOCUS ON THE SENATE AND WH.

You're right. We should definitely focus on winning back two out of three branches of our government from the fascists. Then we can work on the third. Good advice! :thumbs:

 

[Craig234]

I don't understand this whole Kavanaugh madness. We have a conservative president he's going to appoint conservative judges. Even if you could remove Kavanaugh, they would just appoint someone else. Maybe someone worse. Kavanaugh is not the worst conservative judge out there from a liberal perspective.

We have a conservative president because they stole the election, filling a Supreme Court seat vacant because they stole the seat. While he will appoint right-wing (not conservative) plutocrat judges, we can still not only fight each on on the merits of that, but on additional grounds when they're even worse than that, such as Kavanaugh's lying to Congress. And he does seem as bad as the typical bad right-wing people.

 

[Craig234]

Insisting they're trash and claiming they're politically motivated without any evidence is quite childish.

That's not really fair. Childish things tend to be honest.

 

[Phys251]

I don't understand this whole Kavanaugh madness. We have a conservative president he's going to appoint conservative judges. Even if you could remove Kavanaugh, they would just appoint someone else. Maybe someone worse. Kavanaugh is not the worst conservative judge out there from a liberal perspective.

None of this was an issue when Gorsuch was questioned. Democrats pounded sand over his ultraconservative record but his personal record was beyond reproach.

Even George W. Bush knew better than to ram through a SCOTUS appointee with a shady track record.

 

[Craig234]

I sue hope you guys keep playing these games. It makes me feel better about 2020 every day.

We'll how you feel on Nov 4?, 2020... 'Within hours of leaving office on January 20, 2021, trump was charged by state authorities...'

 

[tres borrachos]

None of this was an issue when Gorsuch was questioned. Democrats pounded sand over his ultraconservative record but his personal record was beyond reproach.

Even George W. Bush knew better than to ram through a SCOTUS appointee with a shady track record.

Trump Fan Nation threw its entire support behind a man who brags about sexual assault, fantasizes about sex with his own daughter, boasts about walking in on naked teenagers, and who cheats on all of his wives. They don't care if Kavanaugh molested their own sisters. They love Trump so much it doesn't matter.