General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhen will Justice Roberts be taken to task on his court containing
A Justice who's wife was part of a Seditious Conspiracy to overthrow the Presidential election of the United States?
Thomas should HAVE TO RESIGN IMMEDIATELY.
Srkdqltr
(6,125 posts)Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Is Robert's part of the Seditious Conspiracy?
I mean what kind of Chief Justice would allow another Supreme Court Justice sit on the bench while married to a person that orchestrated an attack on the United States.
stopdiggin
(11,089 posts)Are you under some misapprehension about the role of chief justice - or lifetime appointment?
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)Tadpole Raisin
(972 posts)he voted with the majority.
The only way to change things is to get Congress to change the laws and increase ethics requirements for all judges as well as require SC judges to follow those laws.
Youll need 60 senators.
It would be nice if any Republican senators are indicted in this mess, they resign and then this legislation is passed. Of course that requires DOJ and all their counterparts to have a spine, and right soon.
Do you need 60 senators or just 60% of those present?
former9thward
(31,801 posts)They can regulate the judges on the lower federal courts,
https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-3/35-the-theory-of-plenary-congressional-control.html
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)that won't work as we don't have the votes.
fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)That's how you get him to resign.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)The "political branches" of government - the legislative and executive - are designed to be instruments of public and political influence.
The judicial branch is designed specifically not to be responsive to "political pressure".
bluesbassman
(19,309 posts)It is beyond question that the USSC has become responsive to political pressure. I would argue that it has become the defacto third legislative branch.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Remember the pressure on Ginsberg to resign when Obama was president?
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)replaced by a Democrat. And Republicans have no shame...you can't pressure them into doing the right thing...would that it was possible.
OMGWTF
(3,893 posts)drray23
(7,587 posts)The chief Justice has no say who sits on the court. They all have lifetime appointments. Roberts can also not force any of them to recuse from a case, it's up to each individual to decide for themselves.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)For the integrity of the court.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)For the, uh, integrity of the court.
For Roberts to accede to "pressure" to do something, then he would be showing "integrity"?
snowybirdie
(5,190 posts)He's the boss of the Judicial Branch.
drray23
(7,587 posts)snowybirdie
(5,190 posts)But Roberts is only guilty of bad leadership. Don't think that's impeachable. Now Thomas is totally another matter. Bring that on!
Jerry2144
(2,044 posts)BUt getting 2/3 votes in the Senate to remove him from office? There aren't enough Democrats in the Senate to do that. And there might be only on Replbliklan Senator who would vote yes. Meanwhile the "liberal" media will be playing this like it's a democratic overreach to remove an unpopular judge
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)We need messaging wrapping this court, GOP TFG followers, and Jan 6 insurrection together because Ginnie is the link and they wear the failed coup attempt together.
Bev54
(9,957 posts)on SC. If the dems can increase their number in the senate then they should go for it and that alone may inspire some of these RW judges to retire
Jerry2144
(2,044 posts)But it will still take much work. We would have to convince Manchin and Sinema to go along. Regardless, we need more playing for team D in the senate than the 50 we got. If we can pickup 6-8 more seats then we can afford to lose one or two on an issue.
None of us can lose sight of the need to get more and better Democratic office holders in every position from local school board and dog catcher to senate
Response to Bluethroughu (Original post)
snowybirdie This message was self-deleted by its author.
multigraincracker
(32,527 posts)How is that done for a judge?
Kaleva
(36,146 posts)multigraincracker
(32,527 posts)Incompetent and health reasons that impair his judgement, are just a few.
Kaleva
(36,146 posts)Let us know what her office tells you.
PufPuf23
(8,687 posts)ain't gonna happen.
Polybius
(15,235 posts)Was RGB impeached?
multigraincracker
(32,527 posts)might work.
Polybius
(15,235 posts)Haha.
Emile
(21,887 posts)by the house.
Ocelot II
(115,268 posts)Emile
(21,887 posts)SoCalDavidS
(9,998 posts)A lot of good that did.
stopdiggin
(11,089 posts)this isn't even effective politics!
DetroitLegalBeagle
(1,904 posts)House can vote to impeach, but we don't have the votes in the Senate.
RestoreAmerica2020
(3,433 posts)Was impeached by House, acquitted by Senate. Yet, 2020 gave us the majority to impeach and indict, remove --so there's that, but will the 2 "Dems " [as referenced by Biden ] Manchin, Senema vote to indict and remove?
[Note: sorry, dropped link on referenced article..will add on edit ]
rsdsharp
(9,035 posts)That requires only a majority vote, and the Senate has no role. The trial, and eventual conviction or acquittal, takes place in the Senate. Conviction requires a 2/3 majority, not a simple majority.
Even if it was a simple majority to convict, Democrats still dont have the votes. There are 50 Democratic senators, and the Vice-President has no vote. A 50-50 vote results in an acquittal.
Claustrum
(4,845 posts)It sounds an awful lot like the people that blamed Hillary for Bill's infidelity.
If there is evidence that Thomas did anything personally in the planning of the insurrection, it would be fine. Or if you think he should resign because he didn't rescue himself from the decision to block his wife's text from surfacing, that's fine too. But your argument is simply that he should resign because he has a seditious wife.....
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Besides how can he sit on the Supreme Court and be married to a woman that organized an attack against our Government? Did he file for divorce?
We better take a look at Judge Jacksons husband, I guess.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)We have to make sure that he has no political activities or interests that would relate to any case that might come before the Supreme Court, right?
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)We are talking about organizing an insurrection against the Legislative branch and the Constitution.
stopdiggin
(11,089 posts)by anyone sitting on the supreme court.
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)Meadows? What's he been charged with?
Show me the law Clarence Thomas broke.
Response to Bluethroughu (Reply #43)
onenote This message was self-deleted by its author.
genxlib
(5,506 posts)That isn't his crime. His wife is a different person and he doesn't have to be held accountable for what she does.
HOWEVER,
But that isnt even the most troubling part of the story. It should be noted that Clarence Thomas was the sole dissenting vote when the Supreme Court decided to let the Jan6 Committee see the White House documents. Now we know that his wife is implicated in those documents. That is a clear conflict of interest that should have resulted in recusal.
That may be the most unethical position ever taken by a judge on the Supreme Court. Not only did he not recuse from an obvious conflict of interest, he actively engaged in a cover-up to protect his wife.
Frankly, I think you could make an argument for obstruction of justice (caveate-I am not a lawyer). We wouldn't let him get away with shredding her documents in their home so why should he get away with trying to bury them in the SC.
Claustrum
(4,845 posts)decision not to rescue himself from the decision about his wife's texts.
But that's not the argument that the OP made. The OP is saying he should resign or be impeached because he has a seditious wife, full stop. Nothing about what else he did.
onenote
(42,374 posts)Those emails weren't among the documents involved in the SCOTUS case -- in fact, those emails were turned over to the Committee by Meadows in December 2021 in response to a subpoena -- a month before the SCOtuS let stand the appeals court ruling finding that the Archives was required to turn over the Trump documents at issue in that case.
genxlib
(5,506 posts)These particular texts were handed over but Thomas did rule over the case about an entire trove of other documents related to this same subject.
Since his wife was texting, it is very likely that she shows up in other documents that would be part of that document release. She apparently sent emails to Jared for instance. She could be in any number of documents related to visitor logs, planning sessions, etc.
I apologize if I wasn't clear but he is still ruling over issues in which she is implicated and there could be more damaging information beyond those texts.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... to believe on the face of it
stopdiggin
(11,089 posts)or knowledge that they constituted criminal activity?
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)I loathe Thomas, but I don't think we can do much....maybe if we are lucky, he will recuse himself...who knows.
Orrex
(63,084 posts)Notwithstanding the fact that he is and has always been terrible, his wifes activism irretrievably taints him.
If he had any integrity, he would resign (or die of the flu). If he had any integrity, he wouldnt have gotten into this situation.
MissMillie
(38,452 posts)seems to indicate that he knew his wife was up to no good, and that he'd be okay keeping that a secret.
Baitball Blogger
(46,572 posts)Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)uponit7771
(90,225 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,572 posts)onenote
(42,374 posts)For certain, Thomas should recuse himself from participating in any cases relating to the 2020 election and the events of January 6. But there is no reason to think that Roberts was aware of Ginni Thomas's activities and the Meadows-Thomas emails were not at issue in Trump v. Thompson (which was decided after Meadows had turned over those emails to the Committee).
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... standards still stands.
He should error on the side of communicating vs not
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)genxlib
(5,506 posts)It isn't being responsible for her crime that matters.
It is covering up for her crime that matters.
JohnSJ
(91,942 posts)related to trump and the January 6th insurrectionist
Response to JohnSJ (Reply #18)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
JohnSJ
(91,942 posts)Response to JohnSJ (Reply #44)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)questionable decisions.
Barring that, the only recourse is impeachment, and we know how that will go. Or not go.
Response to TreasonousBastard (Reply #20)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
doc03
(35,148 posts)Beakybird
(3,329 posts)If she and her hubby are conspiring together, then he might have to resign.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)redstatebluegirl
(12,264 posts)It will be the Democrats are trying to throw a Black man off the Supreme Court. See they are not really in the corner of minorities at all. This is what they will begin saying, hoping to keep some minority voters home in November. They have tried to purge the rolls through stupid laws, now they have this issue to beat us with.
Don't tell me they won't do it, you know they will. One of the guys on Morning Joe this morning said Democrats bring policy books to a knife fight when fighting the Republicans, that is really really true. We are nice, we need to get nasty!
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)we can do it
(12,116 posts)Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)And that's not today.
we can do it
(12,116 posts)Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)we can do it
(12,116 posts)Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Of the court is not nonsense. Nonsense is walking away from consequences for a Supreme Court Justice who's wife has text messages between her and the President's COS pushing to overturn the election of the POTUS, while implying her husband was in knowing this was a plan.
Time and pressure.
we can do it
(12,116 posts)inthewind21
(4,616 posts)You said so. Got it. How high is it up there on your horse?
Effete Snob
(8,387 posts)It is a contradiction in terms:
"Public pressure" on any court, with the idea that the court should respond to "public pressure", is NOT consistent with "upholding the integrity of the court."
Courts rule on the matters before them. They are specifically designed not to be responsive to "public pressure".
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)have the votes for impeachment and removal...And I don't see Thomas caring about public comments...so what do you think should happen. Should the House go through a useless impeachment that will end with Thomas still on the court as the senate won't convict- in an election year no less? That is not fighting but political suicide.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Republicans do, until it sinks into the electorate that electing Republicans to office has brought us a Supreme Court that favors a political party over rule of law.
It's like a script they share as a memo that goes out to the whole republican party nationwide and they circle talk and just bring up the issue and repeat.
Thomas's wife was part of the organizing of an insurrection against our country. A Supreme Court justice's wife, wow.
What did he know, and what does he think now?
Demsrule86
(68,347 posts)about. You and I are all into the insurrection but most people I know are not...it is the past. They are concerned with war, economics, and gas prices. Now I want those who tried to overthrow our government prosecuted of course. But I don't think that would be our go-to issue for the midterms.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)This post was a reaction to news getting attention about the big fish actors of the insurrection and it also still matters.
I live in a blue state red county and combat the right wing talking points daily with facts, such as
Russia invaded a sovereign country. Sanctions and aid is working along with determination to be a Democracy from the Ukrainian people. I hate war, so let's support democracies over dictators.
Gas prices are high because gouging has become the norm, call the oil companies and complain or drive less. We have the most reserves and oil is our largest export.
The economy is booming, and workers need to demand their fair share if that means quitting for a higher paying job, do it and let the boss know.
Taxes are not fair because the wealthy pay next to nothing thanks to the rump tax give away for the wealthy. If you want lower taxes quit voting for Republicans, they don't care about anyone but the rich. Tax the rich.
These are always the same issues. Democrats care about everything, republican'ts care about money.
uponit7771
(90,225 posts)... to one of his jurors?
No seriously, this is some direct bullshit
onenote
(42,374 posts)See post 99.
Skittles
(152,964 posts)he is a DISGRACE
we can do it
(12,116 posts)Skittles
(152,964 posts)that doesn't mean their outrages cannot be thoroughly hashed on DU and elsewhere - this playbook has worked VERY well for repukes for STUFF THEY MAKE UP about Democrats
bucolic_frolic
(42,662 posts)CJ Roberts has no power. He oversees but doesn't rule on other Justices. Ridiculous to think he will or should.
Marriage is a contract. Spouse is usually responsible for debts and contracts of the spouse. Does that apply to job duties? Does that apply to illegal activities that influence the job of the spouse? Murkier and murkier.
Tainted? You betcha. What do we do with a besmirched Justice? Drag the process that put him there through the mud and expose the corruption. But any end game is unclear, unlikely.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Of the court, with Thomas continuing to sit on it.
bucolic_frolic
(42,662 posts)Kaleva
(36,146 posts)fightforfreedom
(4,913 posts)That's how it is done. Thomas can say he is resigning for health reasons.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)Srkdqltr
(6,125 posts)marie999
(3,334 posts)Srkdqltr
(6,125 posts)To do what you want , nothing will happen.
ashredux
(2,593 posts)Actually, Roberts does not have the power to make anyone resign.
Congress would have to impeach a judge to remove them from the bench. Roberts has very little authority over the other justices
paleotn
(17,778 posts)SCOTIS Chief Justice of Dred Scott infamy and openly supported the south but remained on the court during the Civil War. When he died in 1864, Lincoln made his feelings known by making no mention at all of his passing. He appointed Salmon Chase, a staunch abolitionist as his replacement.
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)stopdiggin
(11,089 posts)the associate justices are all independent actors - and hold their positions by virtue of their own appointments. They do not 'answer' to the chief justice in any meaningful (or even oblique) sense. And Roberts does not 'control' either the finite direction - or the 'messaging' or integrity of the court.
You might just as well begin 'petitioning' Alito, Sotomayer, or Barrett - for exactly the same effect.
Lonestarblue
(9,874 posts)And I know we all try our hardest to do that! Only with more Democrats who are willing to make some changes with the SC will we see more accountability. The first change needs to be term limitsmaximum 18 years. The second needs to be a code legal code of ethics. The third needs to be overhauling the shadow docket system where the Court can let laws stand without hearing any arguments, as they did with the Texas abortion law. And a fourth possibility, though it might not be possible, is to allow a president to nominate no more than two justices even if that person serves two terms. No one person should be allowed to pack the Court.
Im mostly on the fence about whether to expand the Court, though there are good arguments for doing so and for leaving it at the current size.
bluestarone
(16,720 posts)Expand the court is our ONLY option. (ONLY option)
Bluethroughu
(5,095 posts)ffr
(22,644 posts)by now. Thomas too.
INSANE!
Kablooie
(18,571 posts)With no consequences for any justices.
Just like Trump getting away with everything with no consequences.
Democrats use law and morals to discipline government officials.
Republicans simply ignore those in the pursuit of total power.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)No one does. As long as he's going to behave as shamelessly as the rest of the Republican party, there's nothing anyone can do short of impeaching him or hauling him off to jail. Ruling on a case where he has a clear conflict of interest doesn't break any laws. Even if his wife were to be convicted of a crime, which is doubtful, that wouldn't affect his position on the Court.
If impeachment works the same way it does for a president, I guess the House could start impeachment hearings. I'm not sure I want to sit through a bunch of his bleating about "an electronic lynching" again if the whole thing is pointless.
question everything
(47,264 posts)Lower courts do, but not the Supreme Court. According to Tubin on CNN earlier.
This would be a start.
Thomas has never recused himself while in this office.
wryter2000
(46,016 posts)I kind of doubt it.
The Jungle 1
(4,552 posts)Contact all your congressmen.
Polybius
(15,235 posts)Roberts can't do a thing.
onenote
(42,374 posts)That case involved a variety of presidential records held by the Archives. Ultimately the Supreme Court ruled in January 2022 that those specific documents could be released to the January 6 Committee. But there is no reason to think that those documents included the Thomas emails. Indeed, the Thomas emails were turned over to the Committee by Mark Meadows in December 2021 pursuant to a subpoena he had received from the Committee.
In other words, the Ginni Thomas emails already were in the Committee's hands at the time the Supreme Court ruled on Trump's records.
JustABozoOnThisBus
(23,282 posts)It's the McConnell court. Move like a snail when reviewing an Obama appointment. Move like a cheetah when reviewing RBG's replacement. He got three right-wing Catholic justices seated during one presidential term. He owns it.
Meowmee
(5,164 posts)And no one is going to resign, that is my prediction. I hope I am wrong.
Blue Owl
(49,906 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Not much pressure can or arguably should be put on Justice Roberts, but the full weight of history will condemn him and his revisionist cabal of Justices. Its a shit court unworthy of the name Supreme.