Legal experts warn of 'constitutional crisis' as JD Vance and Elon Musk question judges' authority over Trump

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: NBC News

Feb. 9, 2025, 6:00 PM EST


Legal and constitutional experts warned Sunday that the United States could be headed toward a "constitutional crisis" or a "breakdown of the system" after Vice President JD Vance suggested judges don't have jurisdiction over President Donald Trump's "legitimate power."

"If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal. If a judge tried to command the attorney general in how to use her discretion as a prosecutor, that’s also illegal," Vance wrote on X, adding, "Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power."

It wasn't clear what judge or court order Vance was referring to or whether he was making a broad statement. Several of Trump's sweeping agenda items have met legal roadblocks since he took office.

A spokesperson for Vance didn't respond to questions seeking clarification.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/legal-experts-constitutional-crisis-vance-musk-judicial-rulings-trump-rcna191387

[RockRaven]

1. If judges can be ignored than all the people have to do is seize power from

the upper MAGAts and oligarchs (yeah, easier said than done but stick with me a moment), and use the military to throw them all into a dark deep hole at Gitmo or similar -- and then ignore any judge who says let them out.

By his own words, if it is a "military operation" the judges can't stop or reverse it.

Certainly he will stick to his principles and STFU when he's in a dank subterranean military dungeon, right?

[Irish_Dem]

3. Vance means only special people can ignore judges.

And most of us aren't special.

[eppur_se_muova]

6. Lenin wrote out precise plans for Socialist movements to replace capitalist ones -- provoke the gov't in power, ...

convince the masses you are on their side and will make life better for them, harass those in power into becoming more intolerant and oppressive, and sooner or later the ruled will turn to open revolution to overthrow the rulers.

The very first time I heard all this, it immediately occurred to me that there is nothing in this plan to guarantee that the party taking over is in any way sincere in its purported intentions, only its real intention to grab power. Oligarchy A is replaced by Oligarchy B. New boss same as the old boss. Promised Workers' Paradise never arrives.

Turnip is taking a different approach -- still empty promises and agitprop BS for the unwashed masses, but the nature of it is different; it has to be, because he is replacing a whole system that actually works when it's not being obstinately thwarted with one which is nothing but an unrealisable fantasy, and he doesn't even notice that what's being introduced by his "subordinate" has a lot of features he never planned on (and still doesn't care about). Meanwhile, the real revolution is carried out by willing collaborators installed by the Radical Right over the previous decades. They've been waiting in place for the corrupting propaganda of Limbaugh, Murdoch, Cessbook, Xitter, etc. to weaken the system by brainwashing the masses into believing they really want a dictator, despite more than two centuries of opposing dictators with our blood and treasure. The present crop of dictator-fluffers representing red states in Congress demonstrate over and over that they have found the abuser of their dreams and will stick with him to the death of democracy.

[Tumbulu]

24. That is it exactly and this is why I wonder if anything can be saved.

Or if we are just going to disband as a nation and become a few separate countries.

I think about how much better off blue states would be without trying so hard to support these red states that have no gratitude.

I don’t know, I have only been watching this set up for nearly 40 years now and it was all very predictable.

What I did not expect was the utter ignoring of the hate media (AM, Fox, etc) by the Democrats when they had the power to remove such stuff from Armed Services radio and TV stations. They could have replaced them with NPR and just sports, no need to have only the hate media blasting. It is as though they had no idea how powerful propaganda is. They could have done a lot more than they did. But they acted all magnanimous and statesman’s like when they were dealing with utter thugs.

And despite my love of all the amazing things Biden put in place, he did not manage to get T out of politics. There is so much more that could have been done, but they were all taking the Statesman's High Road which has landed us in the hell that we find ourselves in.

I don’t know why I am writing so much, you said it all much better.

[speak easy]

2. United States v Nixon: 9 - 0.

[eppur_se_muova]

4. Let them "question" all they want, but have a firm answer ready.

Uglicans in Congress are the weak link -- they are actually VERY happy to surrender their power to a (totally fake) "strongman" leader because authoritarians OTHER THAN THEIR LEADER are all masochists.

The put the B in B&D, the S in D&S, and the M in S&M. THEY WANT EVERYONE TO BE BULLIED by Dear Leader so THEY can wallow in the thrill of his power -- including power over them.

[C Moon]

5. Okay. Let me do it: FUCK OFF VANCE AND MUSK!!!!!

If you can step over our laws, then I can step over our laws and I can officially tell you to FUCK OFF!!

Jesus! Is it only obvious to us that these bastards are MOST CERTAINLY ABOVE THE LAW?!

Shut them down, Shut them up!

I could never do anything like they are doing. And it's only because they have lots of money.

[truthisfreedom]

7. Yawn. If that couch-humper wants to fight about it

He can do it with the Supreme Court like everyone else.

[creeksneakers2]

8. This is unacceptable

Its time that our Democratic leaders warn Trump that if he refused to obey the law and judicial orders that he will be removed from office using the 14th Amendment's disqualification clause. It would only take a simple majority and for that only a very small number or GOP votes would be needed. Its time to put every Republicans on the record on whether they support the rule of law or not. Vance's statement is an outrage and must not be ignored.

[liberalgunwilltravel]

9. Both are hell bent on destroying America

It’s our responsibility to destroy them first.

[Moostache]

31. By ANY means necessary... (n/t)

[Bettie]

10. If Judges have no authority over presidential orders and

actions.

Why do they sue over literally everything a Democratic president does?

Oh, because they are whiny little man- babies who cry every time a policy that doesn't harm people is put in place.

[hadEnuf]

11. Vance or Bowman, whoever the hell he is, is full of shit. Checks and balances on the POTUS are essential to avoid

them from becoming a dictator. Neither generals nor the attorney general has total immunity from what they do either.

This mascara wearing fuckstick is floating this idea to try and soften the blow to the public for when they try their total take over. Expect a Reichstag fire of sorts down the road. I also read that Rick Santorum is slithering around from state to state trying to sell a new Constitutional Convention.

I hate to say it, but these traitors are going to need to be removed from office, somehow. I doubt we will be able to vote them out.

[JohnnyRingo]

12. A court can rule that the military can not torture.

...or say it can't commit other war crimes, so the Judicial does indeed regulate the other two branches in legal matters.

[Calista241]

13. it's their way of guaranteeing the appeals court looks at this immediately. n/t

[33taw]

14. How about we start with President Musk. He's leading this charge, he can sit in jail on contempt charges?

We also have Musk's little minions and various cabinet members - they can sit in jail for contempt. We need to get people to stop doing these acts for him.

[Moostache]

32. The FIRST thing that needs to happen is the jailing of ALL of the Muskovites

Elon Musk does NOT have the authority to do ANY of the things these mal-formed Stewie Griffens are out there doing. This entire "move fast and break things" tech-bro ethos needs to be excised from the national discussion. THAT approach works for an industry that is rapidly changing consistently because the mistakes and damage are CONTAINED and eliminated via fast iterations.

Elizabeth Holmes showed this was a abject disaster when applied to medical device research and design. Theranos was a horror show lesson that apparently went unheeded or unabsorbed by the public at large.

Elon Musk and his Muskovite bomb throwers are going to show the same thing with MUCH more damage and long lasting pain and effects. They all need to be thrown in jail for life after their reign of fear ends. If there are no consequences for this, then this nation is truly dead and being an "American" is no longer something to be proud of in any way. That former badge of honor will have become a 21st century swastika.

[Historic NY]

15. They haven't had a Constitutional Law class.

on the separation of powers and checks and balances. We are not a fiefdom.

[GoYouPackersGo]

18. Well, Vance has but...

yeah.

[DonCoquixote]

16. They sure like it when Trump's supreme court

tries to kneecap all his opponents. Tell me J.D, does this mean we can ignor Gorsuch and Comey when they start doing thigns we do not like?

[turbinetree]

17. Hey Roberts and your other 5 rw Supreme fucks thinking today..................hows that presidential immunity thing

going for you now.............did you sit at home today and think of that Citizens United BS...........bet not asshole................

[William Seger]

19. Our first line of defense against a criminal president SHOULD be impeachment

... but we have a Congress controlled by gutless sycophants, terrified of losing their primaries to hardcore cultists.

If the courts can't stop Trump now, then we are a dictatorship, full stop.

[bluestarone]

20. The Supreme Court should be called to immediately issue their order.

Then we'll see what needs to be done!

[pfitz59]

21. The Roberts' SCrOTUS rulings have nullified judicial oversight

The partisanship and blatant disregard of the Constitution have weakened the Courts and sullied public confidence.

[Mysterian]

22. The USA was founded and the constitution framed on protection from dictators

Maybe Vance skipped that class at Yale Law.

[Rebl2]

23. We are

already there. Have been from day one when trump was elected.

[generalbetrayus]

25. I've been telling anyone who would listen

that the Drumpf administration's actions will not be hindered by any court decision that it does not agree with. If the courts tell Muskrat not to do something, who exactly is going to enforce its decision? The courts have no army, just 200 years+ of everyone in the other two branches of government agreeing to abide by court decisions. Don't be surprised if President Musk offers the entire Supreme Court and subordinate courts an "early retirement" plan with no intent to fill the vacancies.

[BumRushDaShow]

27. There is one possibility

The states - and even D.C. itself, since they have been trying to separate themselves from the "Federal District" to become a state... and to no avail. But in the meantime, they have their own police force and if there is a violation of their or even surrounding VA & MD's laws (as they see it), as many "Headquarters-associated" federal buildings are located in those states, then...

[PortTack]

26. JD and others are out there running defense trying to scare us. first rule to fight against tyranny, do NOT obey

In advance.

These are scary times, but please think about it when you post comments that say we’re cooked, or there are no push backs. That really is giving in and that’s exactly what they want.

Yes, SCOTUS made things so much worse with the immunity ruling. We have no reason to believe they will rule against the constitution and separation of powers. They also full well understand there’s only room for one at the top in a dictatorship. They do not want to lose their power.

Ultimately, they will have to back down. Tsf backed down when it came to tariffs, and funding and the other injunctions that have been handed down by the courts. “His” DOJ is not immune…

[Butterflylady]

28. Someone should tell Roberts that he and the rest aren't needed anymore

Because of immunity. That should set their butts on fire.

[bucolic_frolic]

29. Marbury v. Madison was a paper tiger all along, a mere ruling.

Democrats need to ponder how the system works, or would have worked, if Marbury v. Madison was never issued. Where would it have landed? Lower court rulings, and an endless series of appeals, all the way to SCOTUS which has no power to enforce? Advisory rulings? Whim of the executive?

Why are we bound by this current predicament? The current direction where the executive decides everything overturns 233 years of jurisprudence. Corporate, business, civil, criminal rulings too.

I mean, WTF? Is there no order other than rule of the oligarchs? John D. Rockefeller was right?

[mn9driver]

30. All Vance is telling us is that he's a fascist.

He doesn’t believe in checks and balances, separation of powers, any of it. Perhaps he’ll find judges who agree that their courts are illegitimate. Anything is possible with this bunch of would-be totalitarians.

[Deminpenn]

33. SCOTUS should have thought their

immunity ruling through more thoroughly. They should have understood they have no ability to enforce their rulings except that Americans accept their authority and are willing to abide by their decisions.

They made DoJ subordinate to the president rather than independent. The president can merely direct the Atty General to direct US Marshalls not enforce court orders. Then what?

[Bluetus]

34. We have been in a constitutional crisis since 2020 and it has accelerated every day that Trump has been on the scene

Last edited Mon Feb 10, 2025, 02:53 PM - Edit history (1)

Nothing drives me more batty then these morons who warn that maybe one day we will have a Constitutional crisis.

If a Supreme Court halting a proper recount in order to flip the election is not a Constitutional crisis, what is?

If a President letting 1500 felons out of prison so that they can form extrajudicial militias is not a Constitutional crisis, what is?

If an AG sandbagging the prosecution of a President who stole hundreds or thousands of secret documents, shared them with his friends and probably traded it for money and favors, is not a Constitutional crisis, what is?

If disenfranchising millions of voters is not a Constitutional crisis, what is?

And we can all easily list 50 more examples of real issues that have torn the Constitution to shreds. It is already done. We have been LIVING in a constant Constitutional crisis for over a decade,

[jalan48]

35. I wonder if the SCOTUS will use more pretzel logic and tell us Trump is immune from their decisions while President.

[sop]

36. Another day, another Trump "constitutional crisis" and "breakdown of the system."

[Bettie]

37. Our entire government was set up based on

the belief that the people running it would be honorable and respect the rule of law.

Yeah, that's not so much the case.

[kimbutgar]

38. I am getting more convinced that our country is going to collapse before the year is over and

The 🍑💩🤡 and the musk🐀 are going to take over and end democracy. This will result in a civil war and blue states will fight back. How it ends I don’t know but we are not giving up without a fight. And I question the other two branches of this co equal government are they willing to give up their power?

[Kid Berwyn]

39. Obviously, Musk outranks any judge.

Seeing how President Musk sits atop the kleptocracy, he's much higher than King Putin or Dimdonnie the Orange Poodledog.

[H2O Man]

40. I think that

we knew this was coming.

[Kid Berwyn]

41. Hurtling this way since 22 November 1963.

The American Billionaires Who Fell In Love With Fascism Are Not the First

The ultra-rich will happily march us into a dictatorship if we let them.

by Mike Lofgren
CommonDreams, June 24, 2024

“The abuse of buying and selling votes crept in and money began to play an important part in determining elections. Later on, this process of corruption spread in the law courts and to the army, and finally, when even the sword became enslaved by the power of gold, the republic was subjected to the rule of emperors.” —Plutarch, Gaius Marcius (Coriolanus)

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. ” —Franklin Delano Roosevelt, April 29, 1938 (Message to Congress)

In Adam Tooze’s The Wages of Destruction: The Making and Breaking of the Nazi Economy, there is a remarkable description of a February 1933 meeting that occurred shortly after Adolf Hitler was chosen as German chancellor. It is remarkable because it occurred almost a century ago, a prelude to one of the darkest chapters in world history. It is a period that has been thoroughly historicized; yet something about it is eerily familiar and up to date.

The newly installed Nazis summoned the oligarchs of German commerce and industry—Krupp, the heads of IG Farben and the largest steel companies, and others—to Hermann Goering’s estate outside Berlin so that Hitler could “explain his policies.” While the moguls expected a dialogue (in deference to their financial power), Hitler appeared late, addressed them at some length, and departed without answering questions.

The influx of contributions from big capital was a decisive factor in the Nazis winning the March 1933 elections, the last competitive election in Germany for the next twelve years.

The bargain, as Hitler’s underlings explained to the attendees, was this: he had just promised the oligarchs to bring parliamentary democracy to an end, smash the Communist Party, and destroy independent unions. There was to be an election the following month; the capitalists’ part of the deal was to pay up with very large political contributions. It was not a question of should they pay, they must pay; what better return on investment could the captains of industry possibly want?

SNIP...

Fast forward to 2024. In April, Donald Trump met with oil executives at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Floride. After hearing a complaint from one executive about supposedly excessive fossil-fuel regulation, Trump surprised the group with a blunt proposition: raise $1 billion and send him to the White House, and the oil industry will get everything it wants, from a repeal of tailpipe emission regulations to the junking of EV incentives. It would be a “deal” the industry could not pass up.

Continues...

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/the-american-billionaires-who-fell-in-love-with-fascism-are-not-the-first

Harlan Crowe and his sculpture garden of fiends collection have worked to get these sons of bitches on the edge of respectability. If we want to remain the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave, we can not let them arrive.

Here's something else I'd want readers to remember:

Two members of the Warren Commission helped bring NAZIs into US mainstream.



And that played a key role in the rise of post-war fascism. Allen Dulles, as a top official of the OSS and CIA, incorporated NAZI war criminals into the CIA from its founding. John McCloy, as High Commissioner for Germany, allowed Klaus Barbie, Alfred Krupp, eight members of his board, and who-knows-who-else to escape justice. Of course, Dulles and McCloy also were barons of Wall Street and Beltway Insiders, at the heart of the military industrial complex. We all can see what that means for the United States today.

Background:

The American who let the Nazis rebuild Germany

https://thecritic.co.uk/issues/november-2021/the-american-who-let-the-nazis-rebuild-germany/

CIA and NAZI War Criminals

https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB146/index.htm

The NAZI connections of two prominent Warren Commission are NEVER brought up anytime the Warren Commission is mentioned on TV or in the NYT. The “Beverly Hills housewife” went where the US press failed to venture: the inner workings of the Warren Report. She, IMS, created an index of the 26 volumes of footnotes and references that the Warren Commission failed to do.

While I was unable to find that quote you remember hearing, here’s an example of her analysis which echoes in the news of this day:

“Mae Brussell began to study the pattern of Nazis coming to the United States after World War Two and patterns of murders identical to those in Nazi Germany. It was as if an early Lenny Bruce bit—on how a show-bit booking agency, MCA, chose Adolf Hitler as dictator—had actually been a satirical prophecy of the way Richard Nixon would rise to power. “How much violence was there in Nazi Germany,” Mae asks rhetorically, “before the old Germany, the center of theater, opera, philosophy, poetry, psychology and medicine, was destroyed? How many incidents took place that were not coincidental before it was called Fascism? What were the transitions? How many people? Was it when the first tailor disappeared? Or librarian? Or professor? Or when the first press was closed or the first song eliminated? Or when the first political science teacher was killed coming home on his bike? How many incidents happened there that were perfectly normal until people woke up and said, ‘Hey, we’re in a police state!”

― Mae Brussell, The Essential Mae Brussell: Investigations of Fascism in America

Source: https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/40321175-the-essential-mae-brussell-investigations-of-fascism-in-america

Here’s what Ms. Brussell had to say about fascist international’s connections to the assassination in Dallas:

The Nazi Connection to the John F. Kennedy Assassination

Evidence of link between Nazis still in operation after World War II to the still unsolved murder of John F. Kennedy

by Mae Brussell

EXCERPT…

Wild Bill Donovan of the OSS, Allen Dulles and the Vatican

Allen Dulles dubbed it Operation Sunrise. He mounted it from his walk-up office in Bern, Switzerland, where, since 1942, he had maintained contact with key nazis. Operation Sunrise was conceived when these nazis decided, in the face of defeat, that they preferred to surrender to the Americans and British. The agreement, which double-crossed the Russians, was signed April 29, 1945.

The principle negotiator on the German side was SS Commander Karl Wolff, head of the Gestapo in Italy. Wolff acted with full authority, for he was formerly chief of Heinrich Himmler's personal staff. Wolff’s relationship with Dulles spared him from the dock at Nuremberg, but when it was later discovered that he had dispatched "at least" 300,000 Jews to the Treblinka death camp he was handed a token sentence. In 1983 Wolff made the social pages when he and some of his old SS buddies sojourned on the late Hermann Goering's yacht Carin II of Hamburg. The skipper was Gert Heidemann, an avowed Hamburg nazi. The yacht belonged to the widow, Emmy Goering, whose estate attorney was the celebrated Melvin Belli. Belli has always had an eclectic clientele. He represented Jack Ruby after he shot Oswald. And he represented actor Errol Flynn's family interests. Flynn (once a close friend of Ronald Reagan) has been identified as having collaborated with the Gestapo.

When Wolff hammered out the secret surrender terms with Dulles, he had in the back of his mind a safe diaspora for his nazi compatriots. This is where the OSS, William Donovan and the sovereign state of the Vatican came in. "Wild Bill" Donovan was top dog in the OSS. Shortly before the Germans overran Europe, Father Felix Morlion, a papal functionary, had set up a Vatican intelligence organization called Pro Deo in Lisbon. When the U.S. entered the war Donovan moved Morlion lock, stock and barrel to New York and opened a sizeable bank account for him to draw on. The priest founded the American Council for International Promotion of Democracy Under God, on 60th Street. In the same building is the office of William Taub, whose name popped up during the Watergate affair. Taub is well-known as a wide-ranging middleman for such powerful figures as Nixon, Howard Hughes, Aristotle Onassis and Jimmy Hoffa, and his behind-the-scenes maneuvers were invaluable to Nixon in his 1960 run at the presidency. Taub was especially close to Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviania of the Holy See, who arranged Mussolini's 1929 "donation" of $89 million to the Vatican to ensure its neutrality with Mussolini and Hitler. The money went into a special fund in the Vatican Bank, and after the war part of it was entrusted to "God's Banker" Michele Sindona for investment. Sindona channeled a good chunk of it to the Nixon campaign.

When Rome was liberated in 1944 Morlion and Pro Deo relocated there. In recognition of Donovan's good works on behalf of Pro Deo, Pope Plus XII knighted him with the Grand Cross of the Order of St. Sylvester. And before he flew off to Washington to cut his deal with the CIA, Reinhard Gehlen received the Sovereign Military Order of Malta award from the Pontiff. So did James Jesus Angleton, a Donovan operative in Rome who became the CIA's chief of counterintelligence.

For Dulles, Operation Sunset was a personal triumph, one that set in motion his rise to the top of the intelligence heap. In 1963, by virtue of that position, he became the CIA's representative on the Warren Commission.

CONTINUES…

http://www.maebrussell.com/Mae%20Brussell%20Articles/Nazi%20Connection%20to%20JFK%20Assass.html

Ms. Brussell passed away in 1988 at age 66, two years after that was published. What a loss for our nation. FTR, her writings have been buttresses by what’s been revealed since then.

Sorry to do a giant info dump of stuff you know, H2O Man, but I am sore pissed at these bastards. Right now, all we got for ammo is the truth. Thank goodness for DU and good DUers who give a damn.

[Baron2024]

48. This Is A Good Comment

This really deserves to be it's own OP thread. You should repost it. Good work.

[sakabatou]

42. Less than a month in, and we already have a constitutional crisis

WTAF.

[Initech]

43. This entire fucking worthless administration has been one gigantic constitutional crisis after another.

This guy has usurped his power to the point where he's absolutely abusing it. Something has to be done, but there's no one who can stop him right now.

[Pacifist Patriot]

44. "headed towards?" I feel like we've been in one since 1972.

[Karasu]

45. If they can simply be ignored, what good are they? What good is the entire system? Gods know there were plenty of court

orders I would've loved to simply ignore during Biden's presidency (Roe v. Wade overturn, much?). This is the full-on constitutional crisis we could have (and should have) avoided immediately after 1/6/21. But no, somehow we're fucking here, with a new king on American soil--in the form of an insurrectionist who wasn't even legally allowed to run for office.

There is no turning back from this, and this entire administration should be fucking overthrown if they follow through. But I don't see that happening in this horribly uneducated, ridiculously complacent country.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

46. What did JD Vance learn in Yale law school?

Guess he's a DEI - dreadfully extreme idiot.

Or how about that oath he took to defend the Constitution when he enlisted in the Marines?

But I guess we shouldn't be surprised. He threw his wife under the bus when he defended one of Muskrat's racist incel hacker bros.

As for Musk may he get a deadly potent batch of ketamine.

[BumRushDaShow]

47. "What did JD Vance learn in Yale law school?"

How to dress in drag!

[ShazzieB]

50. No, he didn't learn a thing about how to dress in drag!

If he had, he wouldn't be so fricking TERRIBLE at it!

[BumRushDaShow]

52. LOL

[ShazzieB]

49. I agree we're headed for a constituional crisis, if not already there, but what does that actually mean?

I heard the words "constitutional crisis" many times during Trump 1.0, and I'm hearing them again now, but I've never been sure what it really means in concrete terms. Who decides these things, and what happens next?

So far, it just seems like these are fancy words that are being thrown around. I agree with them, but now what?

[Kid Berwyn]

51. What crisis? Trump thinks he's above the law.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is now a traitor.

[Aussie105]

53. Surprised? Well, SCOTUS did rule that a sitting POTUS can do anything he wants.

And Trump smiled.

Go back or ignore promises made?
Destroy the Constitution?
Ignore laws?
Make life difficult for everyone?
Demolish or shrink important government departments?
Mess around in global politics?

No problem, SCOTUS gave the OK.

Next minute - Trump abolishes the SCOTUS setup because it is too expensive. DOGE said to!
Watch them complain!

[DallasNE]

54. Misses The Point

A General is not the head of any branch of government. If a General disobeys a command the Commander in Chief (President) will fire them as Truman did with MacArthur. If an AG, using her discretion as a prosecutor, files charges against someone the defendant can certainly appeal to a Judge, and the Judge can then examine the case and rule the case can proceed or rule that the AG overstepped her authority and dismiss the case.

Vance is a Yale-educated lawyer, so he should know better than to make such ridiculous claims, though right now, oaths mean nothing, and the guard rails are in tatters.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

55. Impeachment and Removal of Judges: An Explainer

MAGA idiots want to impeach federal judges who are ruling against trump and Musk. Here is a good explanation of the law on the impeachment of federal judges from the Brennan Center. There have been few judiciaql impeachments and there have been no removals due to the rulings of a federal judge.

Judicial impeachment shouldn’t be used to punish judges for their rulings. Here’s why.

Link to tweet

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/impeachment-and-removal-judges-explainer

The U.S. Constitution provides little guidance as to what offenses constitute grounds for the impeachment of federal judges: as with other government officials, judges may be removed following impeachment and conviction for “Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors”; otherwise, under Article III, Section 1, judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour.”

However, the impeachment power has historically been limited to cases of serious ethical or criminal misconduct. For example, in 2009, the House impeached U.S. District Court Judge Samuel B. Kent on charges of sexual assault, obstructing an official proceeding, and making false statements. Kent resigned before the Senate tried the charges. The next year, the House impeached U.S. District Court Judge G. Thomas Porteous Jr. on allegations of bribery and making false statements. The Senate convicted Porteous. Of the 15 federal judicial impeachments in history, the most common charges were making false statements, favoritism toward litigants or special appointees, intoxication on the bench, and abuse of the contempt power......

Can judges be impeached for their rulings?

Historical practice suggests a strong tradition against impeaching judges for their decisions. Chief Justice William Rehnquist, who wrote a book examining the history of judicial impeachment, found that early historical uses of the impeachment power established a norm that “judicial acts — their rulings from the bench — would not be a basis for removal from office by impeachment and conviction.”

According to Rehnquist, the attempted removal of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase in 1804 was, in particular, “enormously important in securing the kind of judicial independence contemplated by” the Constitution. President Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican, encouraged the House to impeach Chase, a Federalist, after Chase openly criticized the president and his policies to a Baltimore grand jury. In addition to the charge that his partisan statements undermined the judiciary, the charges against Chase ultimately included inflated allegations of misconduct in several trials. The House impeached Chase in 1804, but the following year, the Senate declined to convict, despite Jefferson’s party holding a supermajority. This failed impeachment helped set the bounds of the proper use of the impeachment power — including that judicial decisions should not be a basis for removing judges from the bench.

This norm contributes to the United States’ carefully balanced three-branch system of government, which requires that judges remain insulated from political pressure when deciding cases. Job security is one important contributor to maintaining judicial independence — so that judges are deciding cases based on their understanding of what the law requires and not worrying that they could be removed from office if powerful political actors disagree with their rulings.