Will Scalia's mental confusion lead a parade of 4 out the door?

[CK_John]

IMO, Scalia is showing all the signs of dementia and was the reason the Chief Justice flipped in order to avoid disclosure.

But will now press for his departure or disclosure.

[Firebrand Gary]

1. Im not following, disclosure?

[onenote]

11. Don't bother trying to follow. The OP is nonsense.

[uponit7771]

2. There's precedence to impeach Scalia for his stupid ass'd rant. If the DNC was like the GOP

...they'd have him out the door already

[WI_DEM]

3. what's the precedence? What other justice was impeached due to a ranting opinion?

and while your at it explain where the 2/3 votes in the Senate comes to remove the Justice if he is impeached.

[bemildred]

6. A Short History of Impeachment

The Infamous Sixteen

Since 1797 the House of Representatives has impeached sixteen federal officials. These include two presidents, a cabinet member, a senator, a justice of the Supreme Court, and eleven federal judges. Of those, the Senate has convicted and removed seven, all of them judges. Not included in this list are the office holders who have resigned rather than face impeachment, most notably, President Richard M. Nixon.

http://www.infoplease.com/spot/impeach.html

[WI_DEM]

8. Thanks, so Samuel Chase in 1804 was the only SC Justice impeached and he was...

acquited by the Senate. Again where would the votes to impeach Scalia come in the House? and to convict him in the Senate?

[bemildred]

9. You are welcome.

I am not much on prognostication about the Congress and what it might do, unfortunately reason is no guide there, and there is an election coming soon, so you are on your own with your questions about possible future events.

[onenote]

10. There is no precedent for impeaching a SCOTUS justice because of a "rant"

I don't know where people come up with this stuff.

[bemildred]

12. You can impeach anybody for anything.

Simply consider what happened to Clinton. It is all political, most of the time.

[onenote]

13. Sure. But the post I responded to suggested there was precedent for impeaching a SCOTUS Justice

for a particular activity -- a "rant." There is no such thing and claiming that there is such precedent is as misleading as a post claiming that there is precedent for impeaching a federal official for having blue eyes or for wearing brown socks with black shoes. Maybe you would defend such posts as accurate, but most people probably wouldn't.

[bemildred]

17. Right, and I made the point that anybody can be impeached for anything.

There was no precedent for impeaching a President for a blow job, or lying about a blow job, either, but they did it.

[onenote]

21. And how well did that turn out?

[bemildred]

29. I'm just saying it can happen, not predicting success. nt

[bemildred]

4. A happy thought.

I do wonder about his mental state, grumpy old men don't really have good judicial temperament.

[WI_DEM]

5. but a lot of grumpy old men have served on the US Supreme Court and many

past with declining faculties--both liberal and conservative justices. After all it is a life time appointment.

[bemildred]

7. And that's good? You think that's good? nt

[pscot]

14. With age comes wisdom

Or not.

[bemildred]

18. I'm 67, with age comes feebleness. nt

[onenote]

22. Maybe so, but feebleness is not grounds for forcing someone off the court

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was 67 during the Bush I administration. I think we can all be thankful that she wasn't forced to step down because of her "feebleness."

[bemildred]

30. Please see post #17. nt

[skip fox]

24. I'm 65, still teaching at a University, and just published my most important book.

Squeak for yourself.

[elleng]

28. DITTO!

Not teaching or publishing, and 67, not 65, but I sure get your drift (and congratulate you.) Dad just passed on, at 98.

[bemildred]

31. LOL.

[UTUSN]

15. & with alleged drug problems (REHNQUIST). & with abhorrent personal philosophies. n/t

[Paladin]

16. "Impeach Earl Warren"

Anyone else old enough to remember all those billboards? There's precedent for impeachment movements directed at Supreme Court justices, and not all that long ago. I doubt that Scalia has anything to worry about, given how gutless the liberal movement has become in this country.....

[bemildred]

19. +1. nt

[onenote]

20. And how well did that turn out?

First, attempting to impeach Scalia is a silly notion since the republican held house (a) would never even hold a hearing on an impeachment resolution and (b) would use it in fundraising letters that would be pretty effective with their base, imo.

Second, if there was a hearing (and even if not, then in interviews) every single member of the court would unquestionably testify in defense of Scalia, which would make the effort look even more ridiculous.

If you are old enough to remember the "impeach Earl Warren" movement, you should be old enough to remember that it was largely spearheaded by the John Birch Society. Following a precedent set by that organization is a truly bad idea.

[CK_John]

25. Who said anything about impeachment. I thing the CJ will use behind

the scene pressure on RW groups to get Scalia to resign. Maybe a balanced set of resignations, Scalia and Ginsburg.

[elleng]

27. Don't dare TOUCH Justice Ginsburg!

Tho I appreciate your suggestion that CJ might institute pressure.

[onenote]

34. The post I was responding to said something about impeachment.

Your post didn't really deserve a further response. I wish I could say I enjoy your flights of fancy as much as some do, but, I don't. In any event, the CJ has a fraction of the influence with RW groups as Scalia; or Alito or Thomas for that matter. And the idea that Ginsburg and Scalia would agree to step down, together or separately, is delusional. Among other things, its been nearly 100 years since Congress confirmed a new Supreme Court justice within 6 months of a presidential election.

[Paladin]

33. Thanks For Demonstating The Last Sentence Of My Post. (nt)

[GoCubsGo]

23. No.

Unfortunately, there are a substantial number of people in this country who consider Scalia's behavior to be perfectly normal and acceptable. Many of the wing nuts around here are actually cheering on this lunatic.

[elleng]

26. While I don't think scalia's mental whatever had ANYTHING to do with Roberts' decision,

it IS possible, if scalia really IS out of it, and not just more in love with himself than has appeared in the past, there might be some pressure, from within, for his departure.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

32. Are you talking about the fact Scalia wears no clothes under his robe and likes to wander the halls

flipping up his robe at the other Justices and clerks and giggling maniacally?

[cherokeeprogressive]

35. That there's some funny shit...