Reply #11: SCALIA is the one who should be impeached.

[Usrename]

He had an overnighter with the defendant, while trying the case, and he still refused to recuse himself.

He needs to be impeached because it's good politics. Forcing him and his right-wing allies to publicly defend his behavior.

A sleepover with the DEFENDANT. During the trial. He refused to recuse himself.

He should be forced to resign over it. It's hideous behavior for ANY judge. And you should hear his excuse for it. He thinks it's the same thing as going to a state function with a defendant.

The guy needs to go. And it's good politics. Let the shrieking heads explode for a while trying to come up with a good story justify a sleepover with the defendant in a case that he is sitting on. I'd love to see them squirm.

Win or lose, it can only be good theater for our side. Impeach Scalia now.


Here are some articles that explain the specific case that is the basis of what I'm ranting about.

SCALIA'S EXPLANATION FOR RECUSAL REFUSAL IS UNCONVINCING
Professor William G. Ross
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/ross1.php

A Closer Look At The Case From Which Justice Scalia Has Refused To Recuse Himself:
The Momentous Stakes, and the Larger Political Context
By JOHN W. DEAN
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20040326.html

Impeachment of Scalia over this would be politically correct.

I would just love to hear Rush and Hannity fumble around trying to come up with a justification for a judge to spend the night with the defendant in a case he is hearing.






Bybee is so obscure and the arguments would be so technical and diverse. “Does international law apply to US judges?” – that sort of thing. If any of these questions goes to the SCOTUS now, it’s in worse shape than when it decided Bush v Gore. I don’t trust that anything can be done for international justice until we can change the make up of the Court.

Impeachment of Bybee is probably the correct thing to do, but it is political quicksand. His backers will rally around him and it will be like beating our heads against a wall again.

Scalia would be a completely different story. He only has some hypertechnical argument that no one(not even his friends) believes. Cheney's approvals are in the toilet too, which should only help in making it very easy to do, so politically it's a win-win all around. Let the opposition try to defend this kind of criminal cronyism. It's impossible to deny that it's criminal. And it's that special brand of "in your face, what are you going to do about it" type of criminality that makes for good political theater.

At least, that's what I think.

Scalia told a gathering at Amherst College on Tuesday night there was nothing improper about his accompanying Cheney to Louisiana last month to hunt ducks. The trip came three weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Bush administration's appeal in a case involving private meetings of Cheney's energy task force.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/18/politics/main607115.shtml

If we start pouding on Scalia, what are they gonna do about it? I think it's the perfect strategy.

It is a very good political argument that goes right to the heart of bad government, and it makes them try and defend poor conduct.

Scalia won't recuse himself from Cheney case

From Bill Mears
CNN Washington Bureau
Thursday, May 6, 2004 Posted: 11:35 AM EDT (1535 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia refused Thursday to recuse himself from an upcoming case involving Vice President Dick Cheney, with whom he recently hunted and dined.

"I do not believe my impartiality can reasonably be questioned," Scalia said in a 21-page memorandum, rejecting suggestions of an appearance of a conflict of interest.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/03/18/scalia.recusal /

I just like the whole idea of hitting them while their down.

Their heads will explode. :)