Running SCOTUS thread

Oy.

 

Clarence Thomas still on the Court is a fucking disgrace.

No sane person can argue his financial records should ignored.

And if I run a charity and I use donations for personal expenditures that are not job related, I’m in jail. The same should apply for a charity like a campaign while running for office.

 

They envisioned their lord and master, and then
they surrendered everything to him, for he is them ...

 

If an elected official sends child porn pics from their phone from the Oval Office, it’s not job-related. Same for cheating on their taxes.

 

It is interesting, though, that the term limit we do have now in the Constitution, the president, actually has ramifications with the makeup of the Court. I'm not sure exactly what our country would look like today without the presidential term limit amendment, but I'd guess that both Bill Clinton and/or Barack Obama would have run and won third terms based on their age, popularity and how things were going in the country at the time. If that was the case, the Supreme Court would look much, much different today than it does -- and, therefore, so would many of these important and overturned decisions we're talking about today.

 

The law is what five out of six corrupt judges say it is. I’m sorry if you still believe the fairy tales they taught us in civics class, but it turns out that was an even bigger waste of time than cursive handwriting.

 

Article III does not specifically say judges serve for life. It says during good behavior. That has been interpreted as life … by whom? The people who get life appointments.
What’s good behavior? Thomas and Alito haven’t behaved well. Brett misbehaved during his confirmation.

 

Couldn’t have said it better myself.
We live in a different nation now.

 

And the GOP will whine like little vicious babies at the mere thought of the Dems packing the court. Too far they'll cry! A president can't replace a SCOTUS justice in February of an election year....but can in late September.....if you're a Republican!

 

Supreme Court justices could be replaced sooner than they think. Things happen.

 

Not to work Ragu's corner, but replacing Supremes is pretty cut-and-dried process via impeachment. Why isn't this a primary election argument by Democratic candidates?

 

Dems should absolutely be using SCOTUS as an election issue. Some have been on the abortion front, but they need to be doing it on the court itself.

But the idea that any of the current justices would be successfully removed via the impeachment process is a pipe dream. It takes a 2/3rds majority vote in the Senate and with the Senate's current and likely makeup after the election, you're never going to get to the required 66 votes. We saw that in Trump's two impeachment trials. You might get a few GOP defectors, maybe. You won't get 15/16/17 of em.