HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Would one of you more int...

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:04 PM

Would one of you more intelligent than I am...

please explain to me why a:

1. Supreme Court Justice that can affect the lives of hundreds of millions of people (R v W) be confirmed by a simple majority of 100 people and will serve for the rest of their lives, with no consequences for violating the ethics that could put most people in jeopardy of losing their jobs, or freedom.

2. But to convict a incompetent president who killed about 300,000 people by lying about the effects of a deadly virus, tried to destroy our democracy which has stood for over 200 years, and tried to place "his royal assholeness" as the supreme ruler of this country, has to be convicted by ALL (not 50%) of the jurors that are chosen to convict said "asshole?"


WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

And what do we do about it????????

18 replies, 1078 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Would one of you more intelligent than I am... (Original post)
Enter stage left Jun 2022 OP
Phoenix61 Jun 2022 #1
Enter stage left Jun 2022 #4
Ocelot II Jun 2022 #2
speak easy Jun 2022 #3
iemanja Jun 2022 #5
Enter stage left Jun 2022 #6
Ocelot II Jun 2022 #7
iemanja Jun 2022 #8
Enter stage left Jun 2022 #11
iemanja Jun 2022 #12
Enter stage left Jun 2022 #14
brooklynite Jun 2022 #13
Ocelot II Jun 2022 #15
Effete Snob Jun 2022 #16
Effete Snob Jun 2022 #9
Sympthsical Jun 2022 #10
NCLefty Jun 2022 #17
TigressDem Jun 2022 #18

Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:10 PM

1. He has to be convicted by 2/3's of the Senate. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Phoenix61 (Reply #1)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:15 PM

4. I appreciate your response, but the question is about justice...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:13 PM

2. The Constitution and the rules of the Senate.

1. Confirmation of Supreme Court justices is by "the advice and consent" of the Senate, per Article II, sec. 2. The Senate rules used to allow unlimited debate (filibustering), and to end the debate, it required the votes of 3/5 of the Senate or 60 senators (the cloture vote). In April 2017, however, the Senate changed this rule and lowered the required votes to 51 to end debate on Supreme Court nominations.

2. Conviction in any criminal case in either a federal or a state court must be by a jury's unanimous verdict per the Sixth Amendment and Ramos v. Louisiana. If you're referring to conviction following impeachment rather than a criminal conviction, 2/3 of the Senate is also in the Constitution.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:25 PM

5. I wouldn't worry about a jury at this point.

There needs to be an indictment first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iemanja (Reply #5)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:28 PM

6. Thanks, but the initial question still stands, why not 50% instead of 100%?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink




Response to iemanja (Reply #8)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:44 PM

11. Good point, but we know that unanimous convictions get over-turned on appeal...

many times, because of procedural misconduct or many other reasons.

Why can't we appeal supreme court justices for the same reason. (cough, cough...beer-bong guy for LYING to congress)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:50 PM

12. Because there is no authority higher than SCOTUS

and voters choose SCOTUS members through presidential elections. That's why anyone who didn't vote for Hillary in 2016 deserves a cold place in hell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iemanja (Reply #12)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:52 PM

14. I spent many sleepless nights after that fucked up election for that very reason!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:50 PM

13. Perhaps take that up with Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Schumer?

Democrats will not be Impeaching Supreme Court members.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Reply #11)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 08:59 PM

15. Actually, jury verdicts are rarely overturned on appeal.

Appellate courts give juries a great deal of deference, and they almost never overturn a jury's findings of fact. A successful appeal almost always results in a return to the trial court for retrial on some issue because of an error on the part of the trial judge - for example, incorrect jury instructions - because the appellate court's job is to review issues of law, decided by the trial judge, and not a jury's findings of fact. It is very unusual for an appellate court to decide the jury was wrong.

The only way to get rid of a Supreme Court justice is by impeachment, using the same process as for a president. Only one Supreme Court justice has ever been impeached by the House - that was Samuel Chase in 1805, and he was acquitted by the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ocelot II (Reply #15)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 09:42 PM

16. The Seventh Amendment

“no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”

This aspect of US law is a point of curiosity by English lawyers who are astonished to learn that expertise in English common law circa 1789 is a “thing” in US appellate law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:34 PM

9. The standard for criminal convictions..

…is that guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. To measure the existence of “reasonable doubt” we choose random people to hear the evidence and decide. The idea is that if they cannot be unanimously convinced, then there is likely a reasonable doubt.

There is no threshold of “qualification” to be a Supreme Court justice beyond a very vague provision that it be done with the consent of the Senate.

These two things have nothing to do with each other. They are not in any way analogous to each other.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 07:40 PM

10. Because one is a criminal process and one is a political process

Just how these things work out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 09:53 PM

17. Because our founders weren't psychic. That's the same reason for the mass-shooting crisis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enter stage left (Original post)

Mon Jun 13, 2022, 10:47 PM

18. Got some tar and feathers?

Campaign finance reform.

Cut off the Oligarchs power to put idiots in the White House who will do their bidding.


You want the job, earn it, don't buy it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread