I can’t say that I have ever heard of anyone before suggesting the indictment of a Supreme Court justice (let alone two) for judicial misconduct. I grew up in the South with “Impeach Earl Warren” billboards on US Highway 45 (at least in those days people knew a little about the Constitution), but no one ever suggested indicting him.
Birther attorney Larry Klayman (Voeltz v. Obama) issued a press release yesterday (28 June 2012) bordering on insanity in which he plans to seek indictments of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Kagan: Kagan for participating in the Affordable Care Act1 decision announced yesterday, and Roberts for allowing it. However, Klayman is not going before just any grand jury to seek the indictments (because private citizens can’t approach grand juries), he is going before a People’s Grand Jury, presumably hand-selected from people who agree with what Klayman wants. In previous times, people’s grand juries were called “lynch mobs2.” Klayman wrote:
Ironically, the Court has previously held that the grand jury belongs to the people, and not the other three branches of government. Following established grand jury procedures, I will empanel a grand jury in Florida and seek the indictment of Chief Justice Roberts and Kagan. The Framers of our Constitution created the Citizens Grand Jury for the people as found in the 5th Amendment. By so doing, they created a legal mechanism to hold corrupt judges and politicians accountable under our criminal laws, thereby hoping to avoid another revolution as occurred in 1776.
And I thought he was crazy to try decertify a Florida election that wasn’t held. This is a whole new level of crazy. Hmmm, maybe we Obots should get our own people’s grand jury. I’ve got a little list.
1Opposition to the Affordable Care Act is ill-informed, as they can’t even get the name right. It is not “ObamaCare.”
2”Mob” is often a misnomer because many lynchings were well-organized and premeditated. This is why I think a people’s grand jury is aptly compared to a lynch mob (without the enforcement capability).
As i mentioned before I remember Klayman very well from his appearances on Bill Maher’s PI show during the Clinton impeachment. He struck me as an angry, little weasel-faced man barely capable of hiding a lot of crazy under a cracking professional facade. Rather frightening, in fact.
“Nut case birther”
Isn’t that redundant?
Of course Roberts is a “traitor” (geeez) … but is Kagan being singled out as an Obama appointee, or something in the decision? Why not all of the justices who voted in the affirmative? Oh, I see, they are claiming Kagan should have recused herself, and Roberts should have forced her to.
In short, they want a backdoor do-over!
Surprise.
Klayman would have made a good GPU officer under Stalin. That’s what he reminds me of.
I saw the nutcases have blamed Roberts’ decision on his alleged epilepsy and Obama threatening his children. Obviously they haven’t heard about his mighty Kenyan magic mind-control rays.
so we’ve circled back to the People’s Grand Jury, have we? Because that worked so well last time.
But then that’s the Birther way, isn’t it: “I’m right because I say I’m right and every one else is wrong. (plugs ears) I can’t hear you!”
Great, another Fantasy Tiddlywinks League…
I’m waiting for the news article when one of them tries to do a citizens arrest of the President based upon this…
On Politicalforum.com one astute poster believes that the ruling will be overturned because of Kagan.
Though what court he thinks will be overturning a Supreme Court decision, he doesn’t quite explain.
So what would have happened had Kagan recused herself resulting in a 4-4 tie vote? Would it just have affirmed the 11th Circuit Court ruling in the cases it was hearing – that the mandate was unconstitutional but the Medicaid expansion was OK? Or would the fact that the 6th Circuit Court and the DC Circuit Court conflicted with the 11th by upholding the mandate have any effect on that?
It’s certainly a charcteristic of right wing nutjobs in general and birthers in particular that they seem enable to entertain the notion of honest disagreement or of other people being allowed to form their own opinions. Perhaps that’s just the nature of delusion, as when Apuzzo was crowing “I win! I win!” when any sane observer could see that he’s simply a maxed out loser held in pity by any reader with more than two functioning brain cells.
I don’t understand how a serial liar like Klayman gets away with it, rather than being disbarred for gross misconduct and sanctioned or jailed for lying in courtrooms.
The wingers are telling themselves that Roberts and Kagan colluded, that if Roberts had done “what he was supposed to” he would have bounced Kagan and made the vote 5-3 against.
Do Chief justices have the right to put justices on ice? It is my understanding they do not.
Opposition to the Affordable Care Act is ill-informed, as they can’t even get the name right. It is not “ObamaCare.”
I gotta dissent from you here. The terminology might be coarse or even silly, but equating usage of a media-friendly label with being “ill-informed” because it’s not the technical title?
Does this also apply to people who oppose Independent Expenditure-Only Committees, but who refer to them as “SuperPACs”?
Translation: Any judge who isn’t fanatically right-wing, to the point of dictator-like paranoia, is a traitor and a communist!
That sums it up well.
“Do Chief justices have the right to put justices on ice? It is my understanding they do not.”
You are right – there is no specific process for recusal, and no authority for the CJ to “order” a recusal of an associate justice. There is generally a motion to recuse made under Rule 21, and then the individual Justice decides.
This is how Rehnquist described it in 2004 :
“While a member of the Court will often consult with colleagues as to whether to recuse in a case, there is no formal procedure for Court review of the decision of a Justice in an individual case. This is because it has long been settled that each Justice must decide such a question for himself.”
I could not figure out the connection between Kagan recusing herself and Roberts flipping his vote until I got the answer to my initial question. Had this ended up as 4-4, the result would have been a mess. The 11th Curcuit Court’s decision to overturn the mandate would have stayed in place within the 11th Circuit. While the states within the 6th Circuit (and DC) would be ruled by that court’s decision in favor of the mandate. I am not sure what would happen in other states. But that doesn’t matter since it would be pretty chaotic if the mandate was in place in some areas and not others.
With that in mind, you could argue that if Kagan recused herself then Roberts would have flipped on his belief the mandate was acceptable as a tax in order to avoid the mess that would ensue from a tie vote.
BTW – I share your opinion that it is up to each justice to decide if they should recuse themselves. You’ll notice nobody on the Right is calling for Thomas to recuse himself despite his wife being a lobbyist who advocated against the law.
Here’s some prime wingnuttery:
Even more fun in the comments … as usual.
Oh Savage, is there nothing you WON’T say?
And radio waves could explain why Michael Savage is a raving lunatic.
You’ll never hear him say, “Obama is right”
Fluoridated water too. Don’t forget what they’re doing to our precious bodily fluids.
Thats true!
Nobody cares what Mr. Banned-From-Britain thinks anymore.
I do have to admit that being banned from entering a country is pretty damned impressive on a scale of 1 to Retarded!
Larry has upped the crazy. He says in his WND column that he will use his citizen’s grand jury to indict, try, and convict President Obama of bribery, ineligibility, and treason. http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/this-july-4-a-new-revolution-begins/. He can add his fake court proceedings to the pile already started by Manning, Swensson, and others with their fake trials that did nothing but highlight how nuts birfers are and how much they hate this country.
I wonder at what point, this sort of thing crosses over from free speech into straight up slander?
Ah……more commonly known as a lynch mob.
Hold it in the Church of the Martyred Arpaio and the picture is complete! This session of the Consolidated Cult of the High Holey Birf will now come to disorder! *BANG*
I think incitement is more likely. As stupid as it is, it isn’t slander. It’s political demagoguery involving public personas. On the road to incitement to public mischief, riot, violence, treason, whatever the fools can manage to incite. Maybe they’ll make a pitstop at Making Threats lane.
speaking of the supremes
Cody Robert Judy’s letter to the US Supreme Court
My June 25th,2012 Petition for Writ of Certiorari to make things as simple and plain as I possibly can is from the Georgia Supreme Court, case number again is JUDY v. OBAMA et.al, S12D1584 received June 21st,2012.
If the Justices had been informed of my case it may have altered their decision on the ACA Decision as Obama is not eligible or qualified by the demands of the Constitution for the Office of the President. I feel that withholding my case from their consideration is a blatant discrimination towards me and towards the Justice of their decisions that may have been altered if presented.
http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/cody-robert-judys-letter-to-the-us-supreme-court/#more-24841
There was some serious coercion going on here and by looking at the thuggery the Obama administration has embarked upon, I wouldn’t be surprised that there would be some bribery or blackmail involved. This socialist administration has all but trampled the constitution. The laws broken and the liberal media in full collusion! A free booklet is available called “Obama 69 Lies” and is available at grassfire.com . Check out the facts that the liberal media won’t tell you!
Soliciting against subservience to supposed socialism with empty winger weasel words. TP Maroon, for shame.
Was 69 all you could think of, or do you just enjoy appropriating the associations of that number?
Good luck with your delusions…
You better run back to hiding under the covers before all your imaginary bogeyman come out from under the bed to get you and send you off to the FEMA camps…
That’s a lie.
“””Get Two Copies of 69 Obama Lies When You Help Grassfire
When you help with a contribution of any amount, we will send you two copies of 69 Obama Lies: Deceptions and Attacks on our Constitution and way of life. Keep one and pass the other off to a friend. Simply fill out the form below to make your contribution and request your two copies.
Exclusive Bonus Gifts For You!
If you can contribute $30 or more, we will send an additional eight copies of our 69 Obama Lies (for a total of 10).”””
You’re like some kind of cartoon character.
Helpful translations for fright wing bigots:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150927965841275&set=a.180479986274.135777.177486166274&type=3&theater
Thanks for helping re-elect the President, ToiletPaperLatrine. You are a disgrace to this great nation, and a sterling example of the kind of right-wing nuttery that makes sane independents and conservatives vote Democratic.
– Iran-Contra was subversion of Congress and the Constitution. Thus Reagan was the real subversive – not the communists Reagan had been warning us about, for decades.
– Spiro Agnew shook down contractors for bribes, his entire time as County Executive, governor and VP.
– Federal loan guarantees started with Nixon, for Lockheed.
– Nixon had wage and price controls to tame inflation.
– Michele Bachmann took $250K in farm subsidies. She tells the IRS she is a farmer, and tells everyone else she is a legislator.
– ADM got a 50/gallon tariff on Brazilian ethanol.
– Catttle ranchers do not pay market rates to graze on public land.
– Nuclear power cannot exist without massive subsidies.
– Factory farms take every subsidy possible, then scream “socialism.”
– There is not one public transportation system that lives off the cash box.
– Public libraries are free to all, including those who do not pay taxes: tourists, homeless, unemployed.
The list is endless.
You mean the stories the liberal media did not run, about how WMDs were made from whole cloth?