I don't think those judicial appointments can be reversed. Though his election was almost certainly illegitimate in moral and ethical terms, constitutionally it is indisputably valid. Even if it weren't, I don't think there is any precedent for removing judges because they were nominated by an illegitimate President. For one thing, they …
I don't think those judicial appointments can be reversed. Though his election was almost certainly illegitimate in moral and ethical terms, constitutionally it is indisputably valid. Even if it weren't, I don't think there is any precedent for removing judges because they were nominated by an illegitimate President. For one thing, they were confirmed by the Senate and while they are abhorrent to us, the Senate Rs were constitutionally empowered to do so and they would also need to be overruled in order for any of the judges or justices they confirmed to have those confirmations reversed. Even then, the constitutionality of using anything other than impeachment to remove them would be suspect, I would imagine.
Kavanaugh should certainly be impeached. After his performance at his hearing he absolutely doesn’t belong. I would argue that Thomas should also be impeached. Neither one are of SCOTUS judicial fiber.
Kavanaugh has had some very shady financial windfalls. HCR has alluded to this before, and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has been following his smelly trail closely.
They were approved by the Senate and constitutionally they're the only ones a nominee has to satisfy as to their fitness. Now, if we can find some actual wrongdoing, that would be sweet, you're right!
If we let them get away with that crap, we’ll never get truth and accountability in government. Which is why I support ACLU and SPLC as best as I am able because they actually do the legal work for accountability. I very thankfully don’t see people throwing up their hands because it’s hard. Unfortunately accountability takes a long time because thankfully for most anyway we still presume not guilty.
I certainly agree. Unfortunately, our outrage doesn't move the needle much legally. I would be surprised--but pleasantly surprised--if any action is taken.
As I have said before here, any weapon we use against them will eventually, inevitably, be used against us. Dems were the first to limit the filibuster for judicial appointments, a policy that was then extended by the Rs, for example. SCOTUS could be expanded by each party successively more or less forever.
I don't think those judicial appointments can be reversed. Though his election was almost certainly illegitimate in moral and ethical terms, constitutionally it is indisputably valid. Even if it weren't, I don't think there is any precedent for removing judges because they were nominated by an illegitimate President. For one thing, they were confirmed by the Senate and while they are abhorrent to us, the Senate Rs were constitutionally empowered to do so and they would also need to be overruled in order for any of the judges or justices they confirmed to have those confirmations reversed. Even then, the constitutionality of using anything other than impeachment to remove them would be suspect, I would imagine.
Isn't the Supreme Court awfully small for a country of this size? Time to expand. (And investigate Kavanaugh).
Kavanaugh should certainly be impeached. After his performance at his hearing he absolutely doesn’t belong. I would argue that Thomas should also be impeached. Neither one are of SCOTUS judicial fiber.
Kavanaugh has had some very shady financial windfalls. HCR has alluded to this before, and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse has been following his smelly trail closely.
https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a35853157/sheldon-whitehouse-brett-kavanaugh-debts/
Have you ever read Sen. Whitehouse's piece on the Federalist Society? https://medium.com/senator-sheldon-whitehouse/the-third-federalist-society-f8a3ff2e19fd
They were approved by the Senate and constitutionally they're the only ones a nominee has to satisfy as to their fitness. Now, if we can find some actual wrongdoing, that would be sweet, you're right!
Lying under oath at your own confirmation hearing should certainly count as “wrongdoing”? https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/9/15/20866829/brett-kavanaugh-perjury-confirmation-hearing-deborah-ramirez-new-allegations
I would support that, for sure! Pretty steep hill to climb, though.
If we let them get away with that crap, we’ll never get truth and accountability in government. Which is why I support ACLU and SPLC as best as I am able because they actually do the legal work for accountability. I very thankfully don’t see people throwing up their hands because it’s hard. Unfortunately accountability takes a long time because thankfully for most anyway we still presume not guilty.
I certainly agree. Unfortunately, our outrage doesn't move the needle much legally. I would be surprised--but pleasantly surprised--if any action is taken.
http://www.allgov.com/news/controversies/is-justice-clarence-thomas-guilty-of-felony-ethics-violations?news=842210
As I have said before here, any weapon we use against them will eventually, inevitably, be used against us. Dems were the first to limit the filibuster for judicial appointments, a policy that was then extended by the Rs, for example. SCOTUS could be expanded by each party successively more or less forever.