Congressional Democrats have pushed for ethics reform legislation, efforts publicly rejected by Samuel Alito

  • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Ironically, in an attempt to make SCOTUS as non-political as possible, our Constitution sets a very high threshhold for removal of a sitting federal judge. You need 67 out of 100 Senators to vote for removal. Our senate is roughly 50/50 split, give or take a couple of people, divided almost evenly between the two parties. And those parties are so deeply divided that it’s all but impossible to get up to the 67 people needed to remove a judge, making the threat of impeachment toothless. Any Republican right now who would side with Democrats to remove a Republican judge would be committing political suicide.

    In other words, yes, Clarence Thomas can continue to receive bribes with literal impunity. The only other non-partisan methods of removing him are referral to our Department of Justice for a criminal inquiry. But our current leader of the DOJ is a spineless coward afraid of his own shadow, and even if he were to act, the entire process of investigation, charges, trial, impeachment, and removal would take so long that he’d likely be dead of old age before he was removed.

    • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      to make SCOTUS as non-political as possible

      The most ironic thing about this phrase is the fact that judges have to say which party they root for.