Is There Any Legal Remedy to Remove a Supreme Court Justice?

[David Zephyr]

Is there any historical precedent or a constitutional means for removing a Supreme Court Justice?

[MonkeyFunk]

1. yes

they're subject to impeachment and removal.

[Solly Mack]

2. you impeach them...it's been tried before

[mzteris]

3. hereya go

At the Federal level, the House of Representatives has the sole power of impeaching the President, Vice President and all other civil officers of the United States. Officials can be impeached for: "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." The United States Senate has the sole power to try all impeachments. The removal of impeached officials is automatic upon conviction in the Senate.

The Constitution provides that Justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behavior" (unless appointed during a Senate recess). The term "good behavior" is interpreted to mean that the Justices may serve for the remainder of their lives, although this is not compulsory as they may resign or retire voluntarily. A Justice may also be removed by impeachment and conviction by congressional vote,

[slackmaster]

4. Yes, they can be impeached for crimes or if they become incompetent

It's happened a few times.

[zabet]

5. Sorry, if they cannot impeach ...

I can only offer illegal remedies.

[jgraz]

6. Got anyone in particular in mind?

:evilgrin:

[Kagemusha]

7. There's a political remedy.

Which is impeachment.

[Skink]

8. Bush vs. Gore not enough?

[Peregrine Took]

10. What a terrible stain that was on America's history.

[proud patriot]

9. Impeachment for High Crimes against the Constitution

We did a lot of research on that here on DU after
5 Supreme Court Justices Undermined the Constitution
by stopping the counting of the votes . Shoot they never
have taken the case .


Anyway yes they can be impeached in the same manner the
president can .

[Tarheel_Dem]

11. Is your question in response to Sen. Schumer's statement today?

He now believes that the Senate was "duped". According to Schumer, during the confirmation hearings Roberts & Alito presented themselves as moderates. As soon as they were confirmed, they both took a sharp right turn. Don't know that it's impeachable though. Sure would be great if it were.

[David Zephyr]

16. Yes. I think that Deception for Ambition would be a reason Americans would accept.

Lying to get a job on the High Court will not sit well with all but the Bush fanatics.

[BattyDem]

18. They lied to Congress

Both Alito and Roberts said they believed in stare decisis ("to stand by things decided" or legal precedent), yet both abandoned stare decisis in many of their decisions. I don't know if lying to Congress during confirmation hearings is enough to get them impeached, but if they're "interpreting" the laws in a way that has absolutely nothing to do with established legal precedent or the Constitution, I would think that's certainly enough to get them impeached. They can't use the bench to push their own agendas and ideology.

Here's a very informative article about their tactics ... though it says nothing about impeaching them. :-(
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/roberts-alito-and-the-ru_b_54273.html

[Sarah Ibarruri]

12. Not really. They are like kings.

I think they would have running a child prostitution ring from their home in order to be impeached.

This country has no checks and balances. Let's start out by giving up that myth once and for all. We have been hanging on that too damned long.

[mmonk]

13. Impeachment is the method.

[Fresh_Start]

14. Justices can be impeached

as well as members of the administration.

[Selatius]

15. There is no legal remedy, only a political one: Impeachment.

Unfortunately, politics is not as noble and pure of intention as one wants to believe.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. There is also the political remedy of increasing the size of the supreme court.

It only takes a simple majority in both houses to do so, and with a Democratic President, he/she could legally "stack" the court with liberals.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/26/opinion/26smith.html?...

WHEN a majority of Supreme Court justices adopt a manifestly ideological agenda, it plunges the court into the vortex of American politics. If the Roberts court has entered voluntarily what Justice Felix Frankfurter once called the “political thicket,” it may require a political solution to set it straight.

When the court overreaches, the Constitution provides checks and balances. In 1805, after persistent political activity by Justice Samuel Chase, Congress responded with its power of impeachment. Chase was acquitted, but never again did he step across the line to mingle law and politics. After the Civil War, when a Republican Congress feared the court might tamper with Reconstruction in the South, it removed those questions from the court’s appellate jurisdiction.

But the method most frequently employed to bring the court to heel has been increasing or decreasing its membership. The size of the Supreme Court is not fixed by the Constitution. It is determined by Congress.

If the current five-man majority persists in thumbing its nose at popular values, the election of a Democratic president and Congress could provide a corrective. It requires only a majority vote in both houses to add a justice or two. Chief Justice John Roberts and his conservative colleagues might do well to bear in mind that the roll call of presidents who have used this option includes not just Roosevelt but also Adams, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln and Grant

[stirlingsliver]

19. I.M.P.E.A.C.H.M.E.N.T.

Impeachment.

But it takes members of Congress with guts enough to do the right thing.