General Discussion

Samantha

(9,314 posts)

28. Well he probably is safe from impeachment as long as Republicans hold the House

Sun Apr 20, 2014, 12:55 AM

Apr 2014

He would have to be impeached through the House and tried in the Senate, in the same manner as when a President is impeached. Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments as long as they practice "good behavior" (that is where Scalia's words and some of his deeds put him in danger) but "failure to maintain good behavior" is generally considered to have to rise to that same "high crimes and misdemeanors" level. So for right now, Scalia can probably safely continue on as he has done in the past. Should those new, improved rumors that the Dems chances of winning the House bear fruit, Scalia might start keeping a lower profile, assuming of course the Dems manage to hold onto the Senate.

Sam

PS He is and has been a disgrace not only as a Supreme Court judge but as a human being for decades. There is nothing I would like better than to see him go but I think the odds are remote....

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

106 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Supreme Court Justice Commits Sedition By Telling People to Revolt Over Income Taxes [View all] CatWoman Apr 2014 OP

Sounds like Fat Tony's losing it Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Apr 2014 #1

Rachel Maddow once called Scalia a Troll. The guy on the internet who says shit KittyWampus Apr 2014 #46

awe man we must elect a dem in 16 arely staircase Apr 2014 #2

The key word that keeps him from being prosecuted is TexasTowelie Apr 2014 #3

Thomas Piketty, in his new book, ... JEFF9K Apr 2014 #4

Is That In Impeachable Offense ??? - Remember These ??? WillyT Apr 2014 #5

Yeah, perhaps you should lead the charge, asshole. Cha Apr 2014 #6

Jury results. pintobean Apr 2014 #59

I agree..it was aimed at Tony. pangaia Apr 2014 #81

Yeah, it was named at scalia.. I would never make a personal attack of calling someone an Cha Apr 2014 #84

Funny, I have been accused of a lack of reading skills here. sheshe2 Apr 2014 #92

I "should know better with 141 K to stay out the gutter! Cha Apr 2014 #94

JHC, Alerted on for calling Scalia an "asshole".. I woulda thought it was self-evident.. Cha Apr 2014 #83

Cha, I can not imagine ANYONE who had read pangaia Apr 2014 #88

And, the subject was Scalia, was it not? Cha Apr 2014 #89

I knew not. pangaia Apr 2014 #96

I thought it was pretty funny pintobean Apr 2014 #97

It is funny.. I'm glad there were 5 thinking jurors, though.. whew! again, thank you Cha Apr 2014 #98

Wow. There sure are some on DU with itchy alert fingers. nt SunSeeker Apr 2014 #90

No doubt! I've been on more than a few juries that corroborates Cha Apr 2014 #100

Tell me about it.... VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #103

That man needs to go! sheshe2 Apr 2014 #7

So... 99Forever Apr 2014 #8

Maybe because our Democratically appointed and controlled Justice Department onenote Apr 2014 #10

What will Senators Warren and Sanders say about Scalia's intentions? DhhD Apr 2014 #48

Since Scalia is likely taking bribes fasttense Apr 2014 #64

Perhaps a progressive populist revolution is needed, WHEN CRABS ROAR Apr 2014 #99

what about our people Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #12

This is a Supreme Court Judge calling for traitorous and treasonable acts. 99Forever Apr 2014 #14

I dont like this judge Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #16

Who you like or not is irrelevant. 99Forever Apr 2014 #43

See post #20 onenote Apr 2014 #54

Should Thomas Jefferson have been "locked up in a VERY deep, dark hole"? NYC Liberal Apr 2014 #82

For someone who clearly doesn't understand the legal concepts onenote Apr 2014 #20

It's even more fundamental than that Boreal Apr 2014 #71

Occupy did not "take control" of government property. JDPriestly Apr 2014 #26

they occupied with the intent to disrupt Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #31

The Occupy movement was protesting the banks, not so much the government. JDPriestly Apr 2014 #35

bundy was not part of the discussion Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #36

Nobody has the right to intimidate law enforcement with guns and then call it peaceful assembly. JDPriestly Apr 2014 #37

why are you bringing a bundy up this is not a thread Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #39

Because you brought up Occupy. JDPriestly Apr 2014 #63

us citizens have a history Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #65

Is this speech or peaceful assembly? Iterate Apr 2014 #38

it was an obvious photo op Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #40

I saw no damage at Zucotti Park 2pooped2pop Apr 2014 #42

Their intent was not to protest outside their tent, but on the streets, in front of the banks. DhhD Apr 2014 #49

Sedition: "Conduct or language inciting rebellion against the authority of a state." rhett o rick Apr 2014 #62

Under US law it doesn't matter what it might do. The question is whether it it does so. onenote Apr 2014 #69

Kick 99Forever Apr 2014 #9

Scalia is nothing but a glorified partisan hack! He revels in the fact that the normal rules Dustlawyer Apr 2014 #11

Scalia used to keep his crazy on a much tighter leash. DirkGently Apr 2014 #13

When people get old... Helen Borg Apr 2014 #22

He's really let it hang out now. DirkGently Apr 2014 #24

Post removed Post removed Apr 2014 #15

This message was self-deleted by its author Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #17

Just the usual crybaby right winger routine... clg311 Apr 2014 #18

Guess some laws (wink wink vaffanculo) you don't need to follow. Octafish Apr 2014 #19

This mean drunk thinks Helen Borg Apr 2014 #21

Well he probably is safe from impeachment as long as Republicans hold the House Samantha Apr 2014 #28

In a general sense defacto7 Apr 2014 #29

Next he will be wearing a winter ermine collar with a reversible brown one, with a sewn in label DhhD Apr 2014 #50

I would call sedition a high crime or misdemeanor. eom MohRokTah Apr 2014 #23

But this isn't sedition any more than my calling for revolution while protesting the Vietnam War onenote Apr 2014 #25

As hard as it is to take, defacto7 Apr 2014 #30

WHEN is enough enough??? KauaiK Apr 2014 #27

It seems to me defacto7 Apr 2014 #32

That is one man who I absolutely intend to piss on his grave. Moostache Apr 2014 #33

Scalia's partisanship goes way back. He doesn't even try to hide it. mississippi62 Apr 2014 #34

Somehow I don't think a revolt would work out the way Fat Tony thinks it would Exposethefrauds Apr 2014 #41

Scalia's Salary malletgirl02 Apr 2014 #44

And now too, he should stay off interstate highways paid for by federal tax revenue. DhhD Apr 2014 #52

That's my thought - doesn't he (and his rich buddies) need us to pay our taxes? erronis Apr 2014 #60

Instigator, inciting violence sorefeet Apr 2014 #45

�but if it reaches a certain point, perhaps you should revolt.� seveneyes Apr 2014 #47

There is none so blind.. 99Forever Apr 2014 #51

It may be your definition of sedition, but it isn't the definition that the courts have applied onenote Apr 2014 #55

Perhaps I missed the quote that is attributed to sedition? seveneyes Apr 2014 #58

This message was self-deleted by its author 99Forever Apr 2014 #85

What you're missing onenote Apr 2014 #56

This man is an embarrassment... deathrind Apr 2014 #53

Opus Dei Catholic fascist Scalia needs to be ex-communicated... radhika Apr 2014 #57

Scalia is a disgrace for SCOTUS. He is not the only saidsimplesimon Apr 2014 #61

Can we start impeachment proceedings now? nt silvershadow Apr 2014 #66

They can be started as soon as the House agrees to start them. So don't hold your breath. onenote Apr 2014 #70

K&R DeSwiss Apr 2014 #67

Fine, Tony! Can we stop paying your salary? muntrv Apr 2014 #68

It just shows how corrupt this government has become in 34 years since Reagan . geretogo Apr 2014 #72

With instant news and so many other inventions it's probably just more noticeable nolabels Apr 2014 #75

Exactly . Fox News is the Trojan hoarse entering homes and altering peoples perception of geretogo Apr 2014 #77

Actually according to our nation's founding fathers- CFLDem Apr 2014 #73

Ater I read that I feel we are coming close to the words in the last three sentences . I guess it geretogo Apr 2014 #78

He's a scumbag, but not a total idiot Reter Apr 2014 #74

I concur in part with Justice Scalia, but he won't like why Jack Rabbit Apr 2014 #76

High taxes are relative . In the Nordic countries taxes are high but most goes back to the people geretogo Apr 2014 #79

2016:Primary for your choice of POTUS, but at the polls elect a Dem,any Dem. If you don't understand Hekate Apr 2014 #80

If revolt is justified by high taxes, what should we do about stolen elections? n/t lumberjack_jeff Apr 2014 #86

^^^THIS^^^ Hekate Apr 2014 #95

Impeach him BlueJac Apr 2014 #87

Domestic terrorist. SunSeeker Apr 2014 #91

In other words, just another Tuesday in Scaliaville. blkmusclmachine Apr 2014 #93

get out the vote Miigwech Apr 2014 #101

I think he would have had to be more specific than that for it to be called sedition. totodeinhere Apr 2014 #102

I don't like Scalia betterdemsonly Apr 2014 #104

Not surprised he is a devotee of Ayn Rand. Agnosticsherbet Apr 2014 #105

Commits Sedition? No, not really OutNow Apr 2014 #106