I've heard it said that it won't happen. Why? Because Democrats and Republicans couldn't agree on anything, much less something of this much importance. Democrats are completely beyond any ability to see or comprehend doing what is right -- they will only do things that will give them and their party more power.

Judges on the US Supreme Court can only be removed from their office if they resign or are impeached. In all the years of history of this country, only one supreme court judge was ever impeached, Samuel Chase, was acquitted by the Senate -- so no Supreme Court judge has ever been removed from the bench. That would make impeachment near impossible.

However, unlike a sitting president, the only guidelines for impeaching a Supreme Court Judge is that they serve "during good behavior." So if they do not have "good behavior," they can be impeached -- literally it's as simple as that.

All that's needed is articles of impeachment to be drawn up in the US House of Representatives, and they need a simple majority vote to be approved. If they pass, the judge has been impeached. Then, just as when Clinton was impeached, the Senate holds a trial and needs a 2/3 majority to convict -- that's where the problem would be.

So, did Judge Ginsberg have "good behavior?" Feel free to read her own words:

It's hard for me to see that the use of foreign decisional law is an up-or-down proposition. I see it rather as a pool of potential and useful information and thought that must be mined with caution and restraint.

"We can derive assistance from . . . foreign case law, but we are in no way bound to follow it."

Judges in the United States are free to consult all manner of commentary

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.

Powerline points out that the way she uses words indicates that she does not care one whit about what the Constitution says, she's more interested in finding someone, anywhere on the planet, who agrees with what SHE wants, and then she'll use that as a reference.

He's also got a great line in there about homosexual sodomy. The court recently based their decision to rule for states based on international opinion. Did anyone ask the muslims their opinion? If the US Supreme court is supposed to use international opinions, why don't the muslims get to weigh in?

She also really blasts her fellow justices who disagree with her liberal positions. In fact, if you read the article, it almost sounds like she's talking at a fund raiser for the Democrat Base -- it's anti-American and praises just about every other country she talks about as being better than America.

Is that "good behavior" from a United States Supreme Court Justice? Clearly not. But there's exactly a zero percent chance you could get any Senate Democrat to EVER vote to convict her of impeachment -- no matter what else she might do.

(Hat tip to Michelle Malkin).

UPDATE: K.T. Cat has a few questions for the insane judgemental Ginsberg.

Posted by: Ogre at 04:55 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 598 words, total size 4 kb.