Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Why Clarence Thomas is a clear-cut case for impeachment from the Supreme Court
Why Clarence Thomas is a clear-cut case for impeachment from the Supreme Court
It is never too late to do justice
BILL BLUM
NOVEMBER 2, 2020 11:59AM
With the confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett, the radical right has completed its long and painstaking project to seize control of the Supreme Court, and to reshape constitutional law for generations to come. Barrett's elevation will give conservatives a 6-3 majority on the court and usher in a crisis of legitimacy for the third branch of government not seen since the 1930s.
The right's triumph has prompted anger and soul-searching among Democrats and progressives, sparking calls to expand the number of Supreme Court justices, echoing Franklin D. Roosevelt's unsuccessful effort to add additional seats to the high tribunal in the midst of the Great Depression.
Enlarging the Supreme Court is entirely within the power of Congress, as the number of justices is not set by the Constitution. The court's composition has, in fact, varied over time, ranging from six justices when the Constitution was ratified to 10 in 1863. The panel was reduced to nine by an act of Congress in 1867 and has remained there since then by statute.
While Democrats should definitely demand court expansion if they retake the White House and the Senate and hold the House, there is at least one additional step they should take to address the court's legitimacy crisisthe impeachment of its most corrupt memberClarence Thomas.
Thomas should be impeached on charges of perjury for allegedly lying in his annual financial disclosure statements for over a decade and, more fundamentally, for lying in his 1991 confirmation hearing about his disgusting history of sexual harassment. ..........(more)
https://www.salon.com/2020/11/02/why-clarence-thomas-is-a-clear-cut-case-for-impeachment-from-the-supreme-court_partner/
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
4 replies, 1461 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (17)
ReplyReply to this post
4 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Clarence Thomas is a clear-cut case for impeachment from the Supreme Court (Original Post)
marmar
Nov 2020
OP
Correct. 2/3 vote for impeachment is in the Constitution. Filibuster is just a Senate self-defined
lagomorph777
Nov 2020
#4
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)1. talk is nonsense without 67 senate votes
modrepub
(3,495 posts)2. I think Senate could get rid the Filibuster
It's the nuclear option for sure. I'd wait and let Roberts and the SC see if they want to stick their necks out and piss the majority people off with some crappy decision. Roosevelt ultimately didn't need to expand the court because public opinion mades some justices have a change of heart opposing the New Deal.
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)3. fillibuster has nothing to do with impeachment
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)4. Correct. 2/3 vote for impeachment is in the Constitution. Filibuster is just a Senate self-defined
rule.