Scalia Should Be Impeached For Incompetence

[berni_mccoy]

For declaring there is no difference between a corporation and an individual person, he needs to be removed for lack of competency.

It is just that simple.

Anyone who believes his statement or is dumb enough to say it out loud is a complete and hopeless moron and has no place being a Supreme Court Justice.

[joeybee12]

1. Can you impeach them? Is there any recourse?

Seriously, I don't think there is for SC justices.

[tekisui]

3. They can be impeached, just like the Pres.

But, unless high crimes or treason are committed, I don't see it ever happening.

[joeybee12]

5. Yeah, especially when there were high crimes and treason committed by Bush...

...and they didn't do anything about that.

[lapfog_1]

11. Allowing corporations to completely own our politicians

even more than they do today... is a high crime.

[AndyA]

17. +1

But finding someone in Congress who isn't owned by the corporations seems to be a problem. :(

[indepat]

30. You mean like, generally speaking, the Congress is corrupt, mendacious, self-servicing, and wholly

beholden to the lobbyists (corporate interests), i.e., a corporatist, fascist government of the corporations, by the corporations, for the corporations? :D

[Usrename]

33. Judges can be impeached for just about anything.

From Article 3, Section 1, "The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, ..."

The "treason, bribery, and other high crimes" language is only for impeaching the president.

There are actual, legitimate, legal grounds to impeach Scalia, and I think it should be attempted.

While Scalia was sitting in judgment on a case, he spent the weekend camping with the defendant (appellant) in the case. He then refused to recuse himself when confronted about the inappropriateness of the overnight stay with the defendant while the case was before him.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/18/scalia.recusal/

John Dean explains the whole thing in greater detail here: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040326.html


In any event, NOW is the time to force the right-wing crazies to DEFEND Scalia's over-nighter with his defendant buddy.

Make them justify his bad judgment to the American people. They lose politically, there is no other possible outcome whether Scalia is actually removed or not.

[create.peace]

2. my dh calls him scabies, or sometimes scalito...nt

[wilt the stilt]

4. alzhimer's is my hope for Scalia

just punishment

[MurrayDelph]

28. My view of appropriate justice would be

for him to die in bed
















Having choked on Clarence Thomas's dick!

[Ian David]

6. Scalia is right. Corporations are people. And I really wanna fuck Wal-Mart.

Corporations are like women- the bigger ones just have more to love.

Oh, yeah.

And then I wanna fuck The Carlyle Group.

Because you know what they say... crazy in the head, crazy in the bed.

Thank you, Scalia, for finally making Siemens do-able.

Oh, yeah.

[slay]

14. It's fucked up aint it?

I read somewhere that corporations actually do have the same rights as people - thanks to another bullshit "supreme court" ruling. this is what happens when right wing corporate authority nuts take over - we end up slaves of the corporations - pissing in cups - just to get a job - to SURVIVE, and then go - thank you sir that was humiliating and in in just world unconstitutional but what's that you say - corporations are "people" too? The whole scam sickens me. Corporations are people MY ASS - they have no feelings, they have no soul, they only care about one thing - the bottom line. The more $$$$ the better. So the lakes get polluted in the process - SO WHAT says the corporation. Capitalism run amok is this nightmare we are living in and yet people are so distracted by one thing or another they just.can.not.see.through.it. Bah.

[muntrv]

7. Gee Tony! That's mighty judicial activist of ya!

[muntrv]

8. That means we can arrest corporations and send 'em to Gitmo.

[LeftHandPath]

13. Now yer talk'in!!

You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.

Say hello to Bubba, your new cell mate.

[Umbral]

22. The notion of capital punishment takes on a whole new meaning. nt

[PDJane]

9. Oh, shit...........

they didn't. I just got up.

Sorry, people, this court and all your administrations have been bought and paid for.......and you are no longer a democracy.

[joeycola]

10. well, that was already determined by the courts years ago.

[ctaylors6]

15. I loathe to defend in any way, but did he mean it for purposes of 1st amendment application

to this case? If so, the supreme court did determine that years ago, before he was on court.

I can't find transcript of oral argument yet. Not that he hasn't been clear on his position in prior related cases.

[joeycola]

21. Sorry, but I do not know the context of his quote.

[Davis_X_Machina]

26. Santa Clara Co. v. Southern Pacific doctrine explicitly holds good...

...for 14th amendment, and that usually is considered to incorporate the 1st.

[TheKentuckian]

12. The concept is bullshit. Corporations are set up to limit personal liability

The very idea of corporate personhood is abhorrent and oxymoranic.

FUCK FAT TONY!!!!

[damntexdem]

16. No, he should be impeached for other crimes.

And as I recall, the SCOTUS ruled back in 1896 that a corporation is a person. What we need is a constitutional amendment clarifying that a corporation is NOT a person and defining its status, and any powers or rights it might possess as a corporate entity.

[ctaylors6]

18. here's a great case if you want some background:

First National Bank of Boston v Bellotti

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=435&invol=765

[unblock]

19. ABSOLUTELY NOT!

i want him declared competent so he can stand trial and rot away the rest of his life in prison, preferably for a crime he didn't commit after a jury inexplicably reached an "incorrect" verdict.

[troubledamerican]

32. YES. Impeach Scalia for conflicts of interest.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=scalia+conflict+of+interest&aq=f&aqi=&oq=&fp=7cdddd15828a963b

[Usrename]

34. Exactly. I agree completely.

Make the lunatic fringe defend the indefensible.

Whether he is actually removed or not doesn't really matter. People just know in their gut it's wrong to go camping with the defendant if you are a judge.

[imdjh]

20. His dinner should always be cold. Where are the activist waiters?

All this human garbage living in DC, face into the public trough, and supposedly dining out daily if not nightly, and we never hear about activist waiters who will not serve, or can't properly fill water glasses for the people who should, in any other time, be rightfully tarred and feathered.

Waiters unite.

[Swamp Rat]

23. amen!

:thumbsup:

[HughMoran]

24. ...or worse

This idiot is not part of the human race. He is so easy to hate.

[Davis_X_Machina]

25. The statement by the Court in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad...

although obiter dictum, has basically been treated as settled law for a century.

This is not some sudden brainstorm on Scalia's part, he is right about the state of the law.

"The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does."

It's not a case of dumb, stupid, or incompetent in this instance. Scalia's infirmity as a judge lies elsewhere.

[sam kane]

27. the bitter irony of the 14th amendment

finally freed the slaves, only to give the foundation for corporations to dominate all of us...

[Initech]

29. Fire that corporate motherfucker!!!!

[Wilms]

31. .

[Senator]

35. K&+R