I wish the American people had the will to impeach the conservative members of the Supreme Court.

Me too. Ain't gonna never will.

Can a US Supreme Court justice be impeached and removed from office?
In: US Constitution, Supreme Court, US Congress

Yes.

Under normal circumstances, a Supreme Court justice is awarded a lifetime commission.

A Supreme Court Justice may be impeached by the House of Representatives and removed from office if convicted in a Senate trial, but only for the same types of offenses that would trigger impeachment proceedings for any other government official under Articles I and II of the Constitution.

Article III, Section 1 states that judges of Article III courts shall hold their offices "during good behavior." "The phrase "good behavior" has been interpreted by the courts to equate to the same level of seriousness 'high crimes and misdemeanors" encompasses.

In addition, any federal judge may prosecuted in the criminal courts for criminal activity. If found guilty of a crime in a federal district court, the justice would face the same type of sentencing any other criminal defendant would. The district court could not remove him/her from the Bench. However, any justice found guilty in the criminal courts of any felony would certainly be impeached and, if found guilty, removed from office.

In the United States, impeachment is most often used to remove corrupt lower-court federal judges from office, but it's not unusual to find disgruntled special interest groups circulating petitions on the internet calling for the impeachment of one or all members of the High Court.

The Impeachment Process

Impeachment is a two-step process; the impeachment phase is similar to a Grand Jury hearing, where charges (called "articles of impeachment") are presented and the House of Representatives determines whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant a trial. If the House vote passes by a simple majority, the defendant is "impeached," and proceeds to trial in the Senate.

The House of Representatives indicts the accused on articles of impeachment, and, if impeached, the Senate conducts a trial to determine the party's guilt or innocence.

The Senate trial, while analogous to a criminal trial, only convenes for the purpose of determining whether a Justice, the President (or another officeholder) should be removed from office on the basis of the evidence presented at impeachment.

At the trial a committee from the House of Representatives, called "Managers," act as the prosecutors. Per constitutional mandate (Article I, Section 3), the Chief Justice of the United States (Supreme Court) must preside over the Senate trial of the President. If any other official is on trial, an "Impeachment Trial Committee" of Senators act as the presiding judges to hear testimony and evidence against the accused, which is then presented as a report to the remained of the Senate. The full Senate no longer participates in the hearing phase of the removal trial. This procedure came into practice in 1986 when the Senate amended its rules and procedures for impeachment and has been contested by several federal court judges, but the Supreme Court has declined to interfere in the process, calling the issue a political, not legal, matter.

At the conclusion of the trial, the full Senate votes and must return a two-thirds Super Majority for conviction. Convicted officials are removed from office immediately and barred from holding future office. The Senate trial, while analogous to a criminal trial, only convenes for the purpose of determining whether a Justice, the President (or another officeholder) should be removed from office on the basis of the evidence presented at impeachment.

Impeachment and Near Impeachment

Only one Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Chase (one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence), has ever been impeached. The House of Representatives accused Chase of letting his Federalist political leanings affect his rulings, and served him with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804. The Senate acquitted him of all charges in 1805, establishing the right of the judiciary to independent opinion. Chase continued on the Court until his death in June 1811.

In 1957, at the height of McCarthyism, the Georgia General Assembly passed a joint resolution calling for "The Impeachment of Certain U.S. Supreme Court Justices" believed to be enabling Communism with their decisions. The resolution targeted Chief Justice Earl Warren and Associate Justices Hugo Black, William O. Douglas, Tom Campbell Clark, Felix Frankfurter, and Stanley Forman Reed (as well as several unnamed deceased Justices) for "...[usurping] the congressional power to make law in violation of Article I, Sections I and 8, and violated Sections 3 and 5 of the 14th Amendment and nullified the 10th Amendment of the Constitution."

boo, SC CAN'T EVER BE HE SUBJECT OF POPULAR THOUGHT.

America is on the road to banana republic status.

George Bush I had been in government very long and all the cronies he developed has enabled the Bush family to turn things their way. It is a class based society from now on with the Bush family and corporate influence.

There should have been a law limiting how long anyone can be in government in any capacity just as he did with elected government offices especially regarding senators and house members.

Even with the Democrats holding power in congress for almost four years, and the White house for two, you folks still look for conservative bogeymen to blame.

Why is it unfettered political spending by unions and liberal billionaires is just fine, but money from corporations and conservative billionaires is corrupting?

I'm not pleased with many rulings and see majorities can change our lives.

I can see that from several directions.

Long may we argue.

News flash: You cannot impeach judges because you don't like their decisions.

You didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I think giving corporations people status may be unconstitutional. I think giving George W. Bush the presidency may be unconstitutional. That decision was so bad they specifically stated their decision shall not set precedence.

BBB

It's always been a "class-based" society. Read the history of Boston. Read about US slavery of black folks.

Will it ever end? NO!

The last two appointments to the SC by Obama were a gigantic mistake. How about getting rid of the fat-ass female from NY and then dumping the lard- ass female from Harvard Law?

Maybe WeightWatchers would hire the girls for their TV ads.

Why do you sink to such disgusting comments? You don't have to reply, I already know your patterns. Which is why I rarely read your posts. I should have continued my practice.

BBB

The difference is that it was not entrenched legally. Now it will be entrenched with the double vote NOT what the Founder fathers envisioned.

What I love about this thread is it's litmus like abililty to identify the true-blue, dyed in the wool, kool-aid drinking Liberals

The Dems are heading for a defeat of historical proportions in November because of their short but disasterous reign in DC, and they are all running as fast as they can away from this dismal record and their party leaders.

Their best hope is to gin up enough support from their base to save a few close seats in the House and possibly hold on to the Senate. They have no strategy to attract independents because one cannot even be conceived.

So what are they resorting to?

1) Mean-spirited, and largely distorted personal attacks against Republican candidates.
2) Sounding a strident alarm against their favorite bogey-man: The Secret & Sinister Corporate Overlords

The faithful, as demonstrated by participation in this thread, have bought it hook, line and sinker.

Oh, is that why they are headed to defeat? Or are there other factors at play here?

Cycloptichorn

Being conservative means playing it straight.


Being conservative means NOT DEVIATING from what u r supposed to DO.

If u deviate from what u r supposed to do, like an accountant
who deviates from the laws of mathematics, then that makes u liberal.





David

U fail to point to any part of the Constitution
that u claim has been violated.




Baloney! Corporations do not have votes in political elections;
thay never have and thay don 't now. The USSC never said that thay did.





U r confused about the facts.




That is false; it is nonsense. Gore lost every re-count,
including the re-count by members of the left-leaning press.





That happened only in your delusions.




Nonsense.





David

Clearly that's what Obama & Co would have you question.

It's not that the majority of the American people oppose their policies but that The Corporate Overlords have bought their brains and souls and turned them against what is best for them.

Keep pushing this nonsense Cyclo.

The utter arrogance of the Left has led them to this quandry and doubling down will only lengthen their time in the wilderness.

The Dems are already forsaking true-believers like you. If they hold on to any measure of power they will not be pushing a liberal agenda.
(Unless of course it's Obama and he's already proven toxic to his party).

What will you tell yourself after this debacle to convince yourself the American people really do want to follow the leftward fork? What way will be available to drive the mindless herd to what is truly best for them?

BTW - Good to see you've finally acknowledged they are heading to defeat.

I would still like a member of The Faithful to explain to me why campaign funding by Unions and Liberal billionaires is OK, but funding by Corporations and Conservative billionaires is not.

Its because "OK" is defined as collectivist-authoritarians getting what thay WANT.