Justice Samuel Chase

[Guitar's Cry]

Thomas Jefferson, as President, worked to impeach a Supreme Court judge on grounds being too partisan:

"The House voted to impeach Chase on March 12, 1804, accusing Chase of refusing to dismiss biased jurors and of excluding or limiting defense witnesses in two politically sensitive cases. The trial managers (members of the House of Representatives) hoped to prove that Chase had "behaved in an arbitrary, oppressive, and unjust way by announcing his legal interpretation on the law of treason before defense counsel had been heard." Highlighting the political nature of this case, the final article of impeachment accused the justice of continually promoting his political agenda on the bench, thereby "tending to prostitute the high judicial character with which he was invested, to the low purpose of an electioneering partizan."

U.S. Senate: Impeachment Trial of Justice Samuel Chase, 1804-05

He was acquitted, but the highlighted text does sound awfully familiar, eh?

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

The dems would need a super majority to impeach a judge. The republicans will not side with the dems on this matter because the conservative scotus is doing exactly what they want.

 

[The Hammer]

Thomas Jefferson, as President, worked to impeach a Supreme Court judge on grounds being too partisan:

"The House voted to impeach Chase on March 12, 1804, accusing Chase of refusing to dismiss biased jurors and of excluding or limiting defense witnesses in two politically sensitive cases. The trial managers (members of the House of Representatives) hoped to prove that Chase had "behaved in an arbitrary, oppressive, and unjust way by announcing his legal interpretation on the law of treason before defense counsel had been heard." Highlighting the political nature of this case, the final article of impeachment accused the justice of continually promoting his political agenda on the bench, thereby "tending to prostitute the high judicial character with which he was invested, to the low purpose of an electioneering partizan."

U.S. Senate: Impeachment Trial of Justice Samuel Chase, 1804-05

He was acquitted, but the highlighted text does sound awfully familiar, eh?

Hard to decide on whether informative or a winner.

So have a star.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Well, even in the unlikely event that one justice is impeached, there will still be at least four other conspicuously agenda-laden ones. The verdict on landmark cases may then boil down to the swing vote of Justice Roberts.

The current court has simply revealed the cracks and major flaws within the American legal and governmental system. Impeaching one justice may well be insufficient to address those properly.

 

[sun rise]

The current court is clearly not a court of law but a political institution that uses legal terms as justification for their political decisions. Clearly we need a Democratic majority on the court to reverse their decisions since stare decisis is dead.

 

[Kenny]

The dems would need a super majority to impeach a judge. The republicans will not side with the dems on this matter because the conservative scotus is doing exactly what they want.

I thought it was the liberal justices that the OP was talking about.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I thought it was the liberal justices that the OP was talking about.

Nope! The conservative ones. The ones restricting liberty and justice and endangering the general welfare.

 

[Kenny]

Nope! The conservative ones. The ones restricting liberty and justice and endangering the general welfare.

I thought that is what I said.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

I thought that is what I said.

Nope! Here's your quote:

I thought it was the liberal justices that the OP was talking about.

 

[Kenny]

Nope! Here's your quote:

EXACTLY! Those who go beyond actual justice as per the Constitution... the Liberal ones.

 

[TheBannerofHomuraAkemi]

EXACTLY! Those who go beyond actual justice as per the Constitution... the Liberal ones.

We get it you're for the removal rights and against democracy in general.

 

[Twilight Hue]

The current court is clearly not a court of law but a political institution that uses legal terms as justification for their political decisions. Clearly we need a Democratic majority on the court to reverse their decisions since stare decisis is dead.

That just reverses the bias. It's still political at the end of the day.