Do you think its time to impeach some Supreme Court justices?

[Cicero]

For a majority of the Supreme Court to totally ignore the plain wording of the 5th Amendment and rule in favor of local governments turning into real estate agents for big developers, shows that they can no longer be trusted to uphold our Constitution. It is time for some of them to go.

What do you think?

Later,

[DistressedAmerican]

1. Scalia, The Corrupt Duck Hunter!

[billbuckhead]

6. The Republicans are coming to take your house and land

An excellent good opportunity to trash rightwing judges as activists. This truly is an outrageous decision in favor of corporations and big money. The great thing is that is simple enough for almost everyone but the most lost koolaid drinkers to understand.

[MousePlayingDaffodil]

10. How do you figure . . .

. . . that this ruling was the work of the "rightwing judges" on the Supreme Court, when the four dissenters were Rehnquist, O'Connor, Scalia, and Thomas? In this particular case, it was Stevens, Kennedy, Souter, Bader-Ginsburg, and Breyer who came down on the side of "corporations and big money."

[billbuckhead]

18. They're all rightwing compared Democrats

[ComerPerro]

12. He should be because of his connections with Cheney and the conflict

[stopbush]

2. Note: It Was the LIBERAL Judges who did this.

O'Connor, Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas were the dissenting justices.

So, who are ya gonna impeach?

[carnie_sf]

3. Antonin Scalia

and then let's go after Clarence Thomas

[shraby]

4. It's time for all of them to go.

They overstepped their bounds in Gore vs. Bush by annointing Bush president, didn't open Cheney's energy papers to the public, and now this ruling. They are plainly incompetent.

[bullimiami]

5. not re: this ruling.

but the original felonious 5 forsake their office, honor and duty and sold out for political ends.

that is corrupt and for that the 5 should be impeached.

[Goldmund]

7. If the motive for suggesting this is this latest ruling...

...then I don't see how you can suggest to "impeach them all".

[aintitfunny]

8. It was the good guys - the so-call liberal

judges who chose to do this. I expected as I read that it would be Scalia, Thomas, etc. I was shocked to find that our side ruled this way.

[pocket]

16. yeah, the rethugs dissented

and our guys made a bad, bad ruling

[sui generis]

9. it's time for judicial term limits.

how 'bout that.

[OrlandoGator]

11. That's my vote.

There should never be a lifetime term for anyone in government.

[ComerPerro]

13. No. God No. Some people here sound like the right wing

What's next? Bitching about activist judges?

Hey! I know!

Lets abolish the Supreme Court altogether, and leave all the power and decision making to the WH and Legislative Branch.

Good idea!

[Cicero]

14. kick

[NashVegas]

15. 'If You Don't Like It, Get a New City Council'

Is what the majority opinion seemed to be saying, at least to my eyes.

I don't like it, but the constitution didn't stand in the way of this at any time in the past, so I'm not sure why it would/should now. They've allowed unreasonable seizures of accused, but not prosecuted, drug dealers, etc., for ages. How is this different.

We can't count on SCOTUS to bail us out.

[depakid]

17. You might want to read the decision

and consider the broader implictaions before going off half cocked.

That beoing said, you could certainly make a case for Scalia's impeachment- based on his contacts with Cheney during a pending case and also for his actions in Bush v. Gore.

An excellent case could alo be made angainst O'Connor, Thomas and Rhenquist for their actions in Bush v. Gore as well. It's more than the ruling (which some have equated to treason. Each of them should have recused themselves from the case due to onflicts of interests.