Law Professor Says John Roberts Should Resign Over Obamacare Ruling

I do not want Roberts impeached because I disagree with his decision. The thought of him being impeached did not come up until we learned that he changed his mind due to political pressure. He does not have the fortitude or judicial temperament to be on the Court. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

exactly how did "we" learn that? ...

not another conspiracy theory pray tell


aaaaakkkkkkkkkkkkkk

You need to read the thread before you post, CBJ7.

If they get rid of Roberts somehow ... can they get rid of Thomas, Scalia, and Kennedy, too? Originally Posted by pyramider

While we are cleaning house, we might as well get rid of Aliotol!

Let Obama choose their successors, as well!

You need to read the thread before you post, CBJ7. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Ive read the thread

nothing Ive read gives me any proof anyone had any direct insight as to what was in the mind of Roberts when he made the decision

some he said she said soothsayer broke the news ... gotta be a fact huh

You need to read the thread before you post, CBJ7. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why start now and ruin a perfect record? Complete ignorance has never prevented him from having a firm opinion.

Im sure there are links that quote republicans saying the mandate raises taxes all over the internet, but Im not going to bother to hunt them down.

from my personal experience on this board, when the desision went to the SC the right was arguing the law raised taxes,and was unconstitutional, I commented if that was the case congress is granted the constitutional power to raise taxes just like it has the power to lower taxes and that alone made the law constitutional. ... and as recent as yesterday, 2dogs called it "the biggest tax grab ever" ...

did all the inane rhetoric from the right have a direct impact on the CJ's ruling? Certainly not. IMO, Roberts ruled on constitutional values, not down the party line.

Refreshing. Originally Posted by CJ7

I wouldn't bother with looking them up either and I'm sure you could find some rather easily. I would say though that I doubt strongly that "the entire GOP" was attempting to frame it as a tax and in fact that's not what they argued in the SC.
I'll bet you'd have a lot harder time finding a supporter of the bill claiming it was a tax. And Dems who are up for re-election are moving away from that at light speed.

The entire SC should be removed for being partisan hacks. There should be no conservatives or liberals on the SC, just the best people that can interpret the law of the land. Once partisan politics is involved, you cannot trust their decisions.

The thought of him being impeached did not come up until we learned that he changed his mind due to political pressure. He does not have the fortitude or judicial temperament to be on the Court. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

And what is your opinion of the judges that go on retreats with the Koch brothers where they tell them how they want them to rule. Judge Thomas has violated rules on judicial conduct so many times it is no wonder he keeps his mouth shut.

Well, this "law professor" is full of shit.

A Supreme Court Justice does not have to give a reason to anyone concerning the way he makes decisions. He answers to nobody, except the power of impeachment that is held by The Congress. Nobody is about to impeach anybody over this.

I am pretty conservative, but I think all of this boo-hooing about how the Court came down on Obamacare is just a bunch of crap. If you don't like the way things turned out, get the vote out and put candidates in office who will vote to either change it, or get rid of it.

Keep in mind, Thurgood Marshal would not even come to court when Death Penalty cases were being heard. He stated to many times that the facts of the case were of no interest to him, he was against Capitol Punishment, period, and would always vote against any State's right to carry out an execution.

Jackie, you need to pay attention, too. No one demanded to know the Chief Justice's reason for his decision. It came out as part of a news story. No one asked for it. But now that we know, it's wrong. Plain and simple. He voted the way he did to keep his name at the top of the Washington DC social registry. That is not what we want in a Justice.

Jackie, you need to pay attention, too. No one demanded to know the Chief Justice's reason for his decision. It came out as part of a news story. No one asked for it. But now that we know, it's wrong. Plain and simple. He voted the way he did to keep his name at the top of the Washington DC social registry. That is not what we want in a Justice. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Hey, I've got a great idea. Pack your bags and catch the next flight to Damascus! You'll love the weather this time of year!

Nope, BigTurd. I'm going to stay here and fight for liberty. I love this country, and want it to become free again. I know you don't like freedom, but I'm going to try anyway.

I know you don't like freedom, but I'm going to try anyway. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Please provide the link where I said I don't like my freedom! In fact, I have been giving freedom a lot of thought these past couple of years. The closer I get to retirement, the more I think about how nice it will be to not have to show up at the office every day! I can start playing more golf and have more time to smooze with the ladies!

And to top it off, the government is going to provide me with SS and Medicare. It will be almost like the government will be paying me to stay away from the office! It doesn't get any better than that!

Yep, it will be great to be free! Indeed, freedom is a good thing!

I do not want Roberts impeached because I disagree with his decision. The thought of him being impeached did not come up until we learned that he changed his mind due to political pressure. He does not have the fortitude or judicial temperament to be on the Court. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

And what is your source for the statement that Roberts changed his mind due to political pressure? The WP blog cite? Not one word is mentioned there about political pressure. And, if you think John Roberts gives a rat's ass what President Obama or John Boehner think, want or desire, you're delusional. That's why it's a lifetime appointment, chief.

A justice changing his mind while a case is pending (assuming that actually happened here) is not at all unusual. Happens frequently, as anyone who has read anything about the SCOTUS would know.

And it is just astonishing that the word "impeach" is mentioned in the same sentence with John Roberts. I disagree with every single opinion he has ever written, including this last. But, he's done nothing even remotely close to a justification for impeachment. It's just more sad evidence of the right-wing lunatics lack of respect for the rule of law....unless the particular law at issue happens to comport with their bizarre and twisted opinions.

And what is your source for the statement that Roberts changed his mind due to political pressure? The WP blog cite? Not one word is mentioned there about political pressure. And, if you think John Roberts gives a rat's ass what President Obama or John Boehner think, want or desire, you're delusional. That's why it's a lifetime appointment, chief.

A justice changing his mind while a case is pending (assuming that actually happened here) is not at all unusual. Happens frequently, as anyone who has read anything about the SCOTUS would know.

And it is just astonishing that the word "impeach" is mentioned in the same sentence with John Roberts. I disagree with every single opinion he has ever written, including this last. But, he's done nothing even remotely close to a justification for impeachment. It's just more sad evidence of the right-wing lunatics lack of respect for the rule of law....unless the particular law at issue happens to comport with their bizarre and twisted opinions. Originally Posted by timpage

bravo


and what Jackie said


bravo