Can a Supreme Court justice be taken off the court?

[Archae]

And if so, how?

Because it's painfully obvious Clarence Thomas is simply CORRUPT.

[elleng]

1. No mechanism exists to do so.

For example, Abe Fortas:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abe_Fortas

[hlthe2b]

2. No. Impeachment is the mechanism. (however unlikely and historically unused/ineffective)

Has a Justice ever been impeached? The only Justice to be impeached was Associate Justice Samuel Chase in 1805. The House of Representatives passed Articles of Impeachment against him; however, he was acquitted by the Senate.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/faq_general.aspx

As to Abe Fortas--he resigned after realizing that he would be impeached by Nixon and with the urging of Earl Warren.

[Lonestarblue]

3. He could be impeached, but Republicans would refuse to do so.

They have taken that sole remedy for holding presidents and SC justices accountable off the table unless it happens to be a Democrat. Then they’ll be all for impeachment, as House Republicans are already trying to find an excuse to impeach Biden in an act of revenge for Trump with no legal justification whatsoever.

We are stuck with Thomas u til he resigns or dies. To me, that’s another argument for expanding the court by four justices to reduce the level of corruption and to get partisan decisions out of the court.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

4. Impeachment and conviction, same as removing a President

But it will never happen. The gop controlled house would never impeach Thomas and we would never get 67 votes in the Senate for conviction and removal. We are stuck with Thomas until he dies or resigns.

[jcgoldie]

27. If they wouldn't convict trump after jan 6...

When they were face to face with violent insurrectionists, then what are the odds they vote against their precious SCOTUS majority? Clarence Thomas could shoot someone he isn’t going anywhere.

[GreenWave]

5. If convicted of treason, murder

but even Thomas is not that stupid.

[Ray Bruns]

11. Wanna bet?

[Bettie]

15. Nah they'd appeal that all the way to

the supreme court and he, along with the other right wingers, would simply declare that all of them are not subject to silly things like laws.

Sarcasm? Mostly. 99% maybe, but the fact that it isn't entirely out of the realm of possibility is horrifying.

[brush]

19. Absolutely right. Or they'd just ignore it by simply not taking the case...

as they're above that sort of thing.

[Zeitghost]

24. It would still require impeachment

to remove the Justice.

[dem4decades]

6. The only place he's going is on another vacation paid by a rich asshole. He doesn't care now,

the corruption has been exposed, we can't do anything about it, and he likes the grift.

We have a better chance of his wife being named in one of Smith's cases, but that won't happen either.

[JT45242]

7. If they convicted him of bribery and tax evasion...optics

At that point, even the rethugs would have to come around on impeachment and removal.

The optics would be too bad even in most gerrymandered districts, especially since he can "never be one of them"...this is one time the racist Republican party would be able to get rid of the black guy because he would have outlived his usefulness.


Has been done to lower court judges for taking bribes, so it is possible.

[Scully]

9. I admire your optimism...

... but I don't share it. They'd let it slide just like they do everything else.

[karynnj]

16. Only with a Republican president

[onenote]

32. It's possible, but proving Thomas took bribes or evaded taxes would be very hard.

On taxes: gifts are not taxable income to the recipient.

On bribery: it would be difficult to establish that how Thomas voted in any particular case was induced by the gifts he received. He's been a right wing asshole from the start and his decisions have been consistent in that regard.

[CousinIT]

8. No. Only theoretically. n/t

[lonely bird]

10. Good question

The process would be impeachment.

That being said the qualifier listed is that justices hold their position under good behavior. There is no definition of good behavior. Defining good behavior, imo, would be determined by congress.

[marble falls]

12. ...

[Piratedog]

13. Resignation, retirement, death, or impeachment.

[karynnj]

14. Impeachment, but while Biden is president we do not have the votes

BUT if a Republican wins, Thomas could be asked to resign or the REPUBLICANS will impeach him. It would actually be to their advantage to do so. They get a younger rw justice and get the high ground of fighting corruption even when the person is theirs. If Republicans led that effort, it would get most Democratic votes.

[brush]

18. You think Republicans would impeach a republican justice?

Last edited Fri Aug 11, 2023, 10:14 AM - Edit history (2)

I doubt that will ever happen. They know they've got a reliable, far-right, bought-and-paid-for lackey whenever required. Their approach, IMO, will be, as always, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[karynnj]

20. Yes - with a Republican President, because it would totally be to their advantage:

1) Thomas is relatively old, but not necessarily in bad health. He could live through a Republican Presidency then die when a later Democrat is President. A new justice in his/her 40s is a plus for them.

2) The many accusations of corruption - not to mention the problems surrounding Ginni mean he is a liability. I have personally heard many people saying all politicians are corrupt -- and that believe is being used with the whole Comer/Hunter issue in spite of NOTHING being proven against Joe Biden. They could lead an impeachment, arguing that unlike the Democrats, they will route out corruption even on their side.

3) Other than their President who would the Republicans NOT throw under the bus if it were to their advantage.

[brush]

22. From an age standpoint it makes sense but IMO a sure bet is a sure bet.

Getting SCOTUS justices through the Senate is not a sure thing. There could be a repub president but a Democratic Majority leader, as there is now, who could refuse to give the president's nominee a hearing on the floor, as McTurtle did recently to Garland.

And then sometimes new justices, if they get through, may not turn out to be a reliable, far-right vote and become a swing vote like Kennedy became...not a sure thing.

It can be tricky, republicans are conservative and reluctant to change. IMO they'll stand pat and weather the corruption scandal like they're doing now.

[karynnj]

23. Your points are well taken

One variable might be whether the corruption issue becomes bigger or becomes silent. (I also suspect that even if his corruption becomes a liability to the right, a Republican President is more likely to get to the same place by privately convincing him to retire.)

[brush]

25. You're right about it has to come from the republican...

side as there will be stiff resistance from all republicans if Democrats press Thomas to step down.

It will have to come from Roberts and McConnell. McCarthy is spineless and won't utter a word r lift a finer to impeach.

I hope it happens as Thomas is a complete, corrupt embarrassment, as the Court right now. Roberts has no control.

[brush]

17. He's so corrupt it's beyond ridiculous.

Last edited Fri Aug 11, 2023, 10:06 AM - Edit history (3)

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who predicted revelations of his corruption would get worse, was on Lawrence O'Donnell last night outlining the depth of the new revelations of his acceptance and non-reporting over the years of gift, trips, luxury accomodations, sports event luxury box seats, golf resort standing invitations...not just from the one billionaire Harlan Crowe, but from two others.

He's just got his hand permanently out and open for the grift/bribes.

And Sen. Whitehouse said even more is to come, and about Alito too. They've just stained the rep of the Court and Roberts is just letting it happen. Congress is going to have to look into it since Roberts is doing nothing.

Thomas needs to step down, but of course he won't as Roberts seems to be ok with the corruption.

[GenXer47]

21. the absolute powers in the Constitution didn't mean so much back then

because people lived to around age 40.
Wanna put the world in chains? Come up with the science that lets people live to 500.

[Polybius]

26. Incorrect

Once you take away infant mortality, the average age of death in the late 1700's is similar to today. The average age of death of the first Presidents and Justices is old.

[Elessar Zappa]

35. Not the same as today.

The life expectancy if you made it out of childhood was 60-65 years old.

[Polybius]

36. True, but that's way higher than 40 like was said

And for the rich, it was higher.

[onenote]

30. Jefferson, Madison, Adams -- all lived into their 80s or beyond

Many of the early SCOTUS justices also lived well beyond 40 -- many made it to their late 60s to their 80s.

[inthewind21]

28. Yes

By impeachment. And the one and ONLY time that has ever happened was in 1805. And the senate acquitted,

[Scottie Mom]

29. Well, there is always the supreme intervention (pardon the pun) of ...

... death.

[KentuckyWoman]

31. I believe the only way is the grim reaper.

Unless he is sufficiently motivated to step down.
Technically impeachment but it won't happen.

[Generic Brad]

33. Take a quarter inch off of one leg from every office chair he uses

It probably would not make him leave, but it would make him perpetually uncomfortable. Henceforth, he could be known as Wobbly Judge Thomas.

[WarGamer]

34. If there were... don't you think the GOP would target some?

The system protects SCOTUS from the other branches except in case of impeachment.