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
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
AOC wants Justices Impeached for Lying Under Oath (Original Post) magicguido Jun 2022 OP
I can't find the resolution Effete Snob Jun 2022 #1
All talk and no action. comradebillyboy Jun 2022 #7
Talking about it is a start, she is pointing out that Manchin and Collins, both came out about being Escurumbele Jun 2022 #8
Manchin and Collins are Senators Effete Snob Jun 2022 #10
I totally agree. This is judicial dictatorship while ignoring the Constitution bucolic_frolic Jun 2022 #2
Well, they didn't lie under oath. BlueTsunami2018 Jun 2022 #3
Exactly correct. speak easy Jun 2022 #6
Here is what Kavanaugh said Escurumbele Jun 2022 #9
Completely agree. 2naSalit Jun 2022 #4
I want Srkdqltr Jun 2022 #5
 

Effete Snob

(8,387 posts)
1. I can't find the resolution
Mon Jun 27, 2022, 09:21 AM
Jun 2022

Did she introduce a resolution to do that?

Like, she's in the House of Representatives. The way one starts an impeachment is introducing Articles in the House, not announcing it on a TV show.

Escurumbele

(3,386 posts)
8. Talking about it is a start, she is pointing out that Manchin and Collins, both came out about being
Mon Jun 27, 2022, 11:07 AM
Jun 2022

mislead during the confirmations of those judges, and she pointed out that THEY should begin the resolution to investigate the judges.

I have read many of your contributions in DU, just today, and you seem to be very critical about anything Democratic, I am starting to have some questions about your goals at DU.

I really don't intend to get into a back-and-forth with you, I read the back-and-forth you had on another blog, your comments are not what I would expect at DU, and mind me, I am all for freedom of speech and against people reporting anyone whose opinions they don't like, but you seem, at least so far, to be very consistent with many of your talking points.

 

Effete Snob

(8,387 posts)
10. Manchin and Collins are Senators
Mon Jun 27, 2022, 11:14 AM
Jun 2022

The way that impeachment works, is that the House of Representatives passes Articles of Impeachment. These are then sent over to the Senate for trial.

Manchin and Collins are both in the SENATE. They cannot do diddly squat to initiate an impeachment.

That is the process of impeachment as set forth in the Constitution. It is not anti-Democratic to point out that it is solely up to a member of the House of Representatives, which AOC happens to be, to get that process started.

BlueTsunami2018

(3,491 posts)
3. Well, they didn't lie under oath.
Mon Jun 27, 2022, 09:22 AM
Jun 2022

They never said they wouldn’t overturn Roe. They used weasel words and careful parsing to step around it but there’s no straight up perjury.

Nice thought, not going to happen.

Escurumbele

(3,386 posts)
9. Here is what Kavanaugh said
Mon Jun 27, 2022, 11:12 AM
Jun 2022

Roe v. Wade “is important precedent of the Supreme Court that has been reaffirmed many times. But then Planned — and this is the point that I want to make that I think is important. Planned Parenthood v. Casey reaffirmed Roe and did so by considering the stare decisis factors,” he said in 2018. “So Casey now becomes a precedent on precedent. It is not as if it is just a run-of-the-mill case that was decided and never been reconsidered, but Casey specifically reconsidered it, applied the stare decisis factors, and decided to reaffirm it. That makes Casey a precedent on precedent.”


What Gorsuch said:
“Roe v. Wade, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. The reliance interest considerations are important there, and all of the other factors that go into analyzing precedent have to be considered,” he told senators in March 2017. “It is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It was reaffirmed in Casey in 1992 and in several other cases. So a good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other.”

He added, “For a judge to start tipping his or her hand about whether they like or dislike this or that precedent would send the wrong signal. It would send the signal to the American people that the judge’s personal views have something to do with the judge’s job.”

Alito:
“Roe v. Wade is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It was decided in 1973, so it has been on the books for a long time,” he said.

But he stopped short of calling the landmark ruling settled law.

“If settled means it can’t be re-examined, then that’s one thing,” he told senators on the Judiciary Committee. “If settled means that it is a precedent that is entitled to respect as stare decisis, and all of the factors that I’ve mentioned come into play, including the reaffirmation and all of that, then it is a precedent that is protected, entitled to respect under the doctrine of stare decisis in that way.”

He added, “It has been challenged. It has been reaffirmed. But it is an issue that is involved in litigation now at all levels.”

You can read the rest here:
[link:https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/06/25/us/abortion-roe-wade-supreme-court#scotus-justices-roe-wade-abortion|

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»AOC wants Justices Impeac...