Poll: Impeaching SCOTUS judges

[charrison]

Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.


So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

 

[sbacpo]

It's a puzzling ruling to say the least. Impeachable? I voted maybe but are we going to impeach all 5 that voted Yes?

I do want to read the ruling and the dissenting opinion before coming to anymore conclusions.

 

[3chordcharlie]

It might be interesting to see the ruling, but I can't imagine it was ever an intended outcome of your constitution.

It's hard to believe that corporations can buy Supreme Court justices, but it seems like they've managed it.

 

[miketheidiot]

im not sure about impeach ment but congress should get in the act on this, and if necessary i would consider a constitution ammendment to limit eminent domain.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.


So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
im not sure about impeach ment but congress should get in the act on this, and if necessary i would consider a constitution ammendment to limit eminent domain.

Well this ruling seems to fairly clearly violate the 5th amendment, so would good would new legislation do?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.


So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

I dont know why you are shocked.

And yes judges can be impeached and removed.

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.


So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

I dont know why you are shocked.

And yes judges can be impeached and removed.

This is an interesting topic. How could they be impeached...charges brought up in Congress? What valid charges could be brought up?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.

So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

I dont know why you are shocked.

And yes judges can be impeached and removed.

Because you are normally for Government ruling all aspects of citizens lives.

So how do we start this movement to remove the Judges responsible for this?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.


So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

I dont know why you are shocked.

And yes judges can be impeached and removed.

This is an interesting topic. How could they be impeached...charges brought up in Congress? What valid charges could be brought up?

I guess you think the courts amending the bill of rights is ok?

 

[dahunan]

I prefer Civil War

 

[Taggart]

I'm in.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.

So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

I dont know why you are shocked.

And yes judges can be impeached and removed.

Because you are normally for Government ruling all aspects of citizens lives.

So how do we start this movement to remove the Judges responsible for this?

The same way as the Clinton impeachment a few years back. Boot all 5 of them and Bush can pick replacements. Hopefully all 5 of them go and Bush can pick a reasonable selection of replacements, perhaps 3 conservatives 1 moderate and a liberal or something.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow. It appears people on the left and right are equally upset with a major loss to property rights. Todays ruling means that anyone can force you out of your property as long as they have the money to do it.

Most of ruling from the liberal side of court I can live with because I beleive there ruling to be honest difference of opinion, but today ruling is blatently against the average citizen.

So the quesiton is, should we impeach these judges that voted in favor of greatly weaking property rights of citizens?

Discuss...

I'm shocked :shocked:. Are you against this decision?

Is there anything that could be done with USSC Judges?

Can they be impeached and kicked off the bench???

I dont know why you are shocked.

And yes judges can be impeached and removed.

Because you are normally for Government ruling all aspects of citizens lives.

So how do we start this movement to remove the Judges responsible for this?

The same way as the Clinton impeachment a few years back. Boot all 5 of them and Bush can pick replacements. Hopefully all 5 of them go and Bush can pick a reasonable selection of replacements, perhaps 3 conservatives 1 moderate and a liberal or something.

lets see.. that is a great representation of the voting public.. considering he won by like 2%??

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow.

Discuss...

Disagreement with a decision (and, FWIW, I disagree with today's decision) is not a basis for impeachment.

Further, I don't agree that today's ruling in any way weakens or violates the Fifth Amendment; it just expands the applications in which eminent domain can be used.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow.

Discuss...

Disagreement with a decision (and, FWIW, I disagree with today's decision) is not a basis for impeachment.

Further, I don't agree that today's ruling in any way weakens or violates the Fifth Amendment; it just expands the applications in which eminent domain can be used.

Why is eminent domain even legal?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: zendari

The same way as the Clinton impeachment a few years back. Boot all 5 of them and Bush can pick replacements. Hopefully all 5 of them go and Bush can pick a reasonable selection of replacements, perhaps 3 conservatives 1 moderate and a liberal or something.

LOL - yeah, I'm sure President Bush would dutifully pick a liberal and a conservative for the court.

The ignorance this entire discussion shows in regard to the Constitution is stunning to me.

This ruling is NOT violative of the Fifth Amendment. I don't like or agree with the ruling, but it has in no way violated the Bill of Rights.

 

[Gigantopithecus]

I can't believe the vote. I'm unbelievably disappointed. I can't remember, but can't Congress overrule any SC decision with a 2/3 or 3/4 vote?

 

[dahunan]

wasn't there a story about a guy who went nuts last year and built a armor plated CAT and destroyed a little town in Colorado?? and then killed himself all because eminent domain

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Gigantopithecus
I can't believe the vote. I'm unbelievably disappointed. I can't remember, but can't Congress overrule any SC decision with a 2/3 or 3/4 vote?

No. That would vitiate the entire concept of federalism. The only way Congress can overrule the Supreme Court is by Constitutional amendment.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: charrison
Today the 5th amendment took a terrible blow.

Discuss...

Further, I don't agree that today's ruling in any way weakens or violates the Fifth Amendment; it just expands the applications in which eminent domain can be used.

How can one expand eminent domain without weaking property rights. Talk about doublespeak.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: zendari

The same way as the Clinton impeachment a few years back. Boot all 5 of them and Bush can pick replacements. Hopefully all 5 of them go and Bush can pick a reasonable selection of replacements, perhaps 3 conservatives 1 moderate and a liberal or something.

LOL - yeah, I'm sure President Bush would dutifully pick a liberal and a conservative for the court.

The ignorance this entire discussion shows in regard to the Constitution is stunning to me.

This ruling is NOT violative of the Fifth Amendment. I don't like or agree with the ruling, but it has in no way violated the Bill of Rights.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this isn't a blanket ruling saying..

"Ok, cities can annex anything they want, anytime they want."

It's saying that if state, county and local laws are passed that it would not be declared unconstitutional.

For instance, we have a State Senator from a class 2 county that has a bill in the works in Missouri that says that any class ONE county can have land annexed by any city within that county. This annexation can be done without owner or city voter permission but solely upon a city administration vote.

Am I on the right track, DonVito?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: charrison

How can one expand eminent domain without weaking property rights. Talk about doublespeak.

Have you ever actually read the Fifth Amendment? It's not about property rights. The relevant portion just says the government cannot annex private property for a public purpose without providing just compensation. It's completely separate from today's ruling.

I suggest you dig a little deeper into the history of eminent domain, which has been around since the inception of the United States.

 

[Ferocious]

LMAO.

The court that decided election 2000 has immunity until Bush is out of office.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: charrison

How can one expand eminent domain without weaking property rights. Talk about doublespeak.

Have you ever actually read the Fifth Amendment? It's not about property rights. The relevant portion just says the government cannot annex private property for a public purpose without providing just compensation. It's completely separate from today's ruling.

I suggest you dig a little deeper into the history of eminent domain, which has been around since the inception of the United States.

5Th Amendment
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


This is not about taking property for public use, this is about taking private property and turning it to be used by some private entity for commercial use.

Eminent domain for schools and roads is one thing, but using it for shopping mails and business parks is another.