Hartmann reading from Scalia's dissent - we're at war , so Constitution not in

[Doctor_J]

effect.

Impeaching that guy is even more crucial than impeaching *, IMO

[LakeSamish706]

1. I think the next President needs to do something about life time appointments...

to SCOTUS.... They need to have some sort of term limits there as well.

[Lyric]

4. No--just fire the ones who are demonstrating gross incompetence.

Scalia and Thomas come to mind first.

[BattyDem]

5. Exactly

Any SC justice who has such obvious contempt for the Constitution has no business being on the bench!

[dflprincess]

8. They can't be fired

but they can be impeached.

[Lyric]

16. That's what I meant, I just used a different word.

Sorry if you misunderstood. :)

[Magrittes Pipe]

6. What makes you think the president can do anything about that?

http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Article3

Supreme Court justices serve "in good behavior," meaning until they die or are removed. What you're proposing would involve amending the Constitution, which the president is powerless to do.

[sabbat hunter]

12. It would require

a constitutional amendment. So that is beyond the scope of the presidency.

The idea of life time appointments to the SCOTUS is an important one, as it helps assure an independent branch of government, not worried about political pressures.

[bdamomma]

2. hey Scalia go duck hunting with Dick huh?

[grytpype]

3. I think President Obama should nominate some 30-year-old progressives to the SupCt

in excellent health!

[dubeskin]

15. Why not even younger?

As far as I know there is no age restriction for Supreme Court judges, and with a Democratic Majority, I see no reason why we should go for someone even younger! Granted, they may not be as experienced. However, would you rather see a fiery liberal youth Justice who bases their decisions off of party policy, or an aged and experienced Justice who considers the law?

[Gato Moteado]

7. and bush said on tv yesterday that he agreed with the dissent

repubs = nazis. any questions?

[no_hypocrisy]

9. Scalia is relying too much on the Koramatsu rationale wherein

the Constitution was sidestepped in order to allow wholesale detainment of Japanese-American CITIZENS during "wartime".

[ORDagnabbit]

10. Impeach Scalia?

[AllentownJake]

11. We are not legally at War

Iraq is a "police action"

The last time we were legally at War was 1945.

[jody]

13. The opinion says "The Constitution grants Congress and the President the power to acquire, dispose

of,and govern territory, not the power to decide when and where its terms apply. To hold that the political branches may switch the Constitution on or off at will would lead to a regime in which they, not this Court, say “what the law is.” Marbury v. Madison, 1 Cranch 137, 177. These concerns have particular bearing upon the Suspension Clause question here, for the habeas writ is itself an indispensable mechanism for monitoring the separation of powers."

See opinion at http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/07pdf/06-1195.pdf

That quote draws a line in the sand protecting SCOTUS' authority to say whether any law passed by congress or action taken by a president is or is not constitutional.

[anonymous171]

14. What nation are we at war with?

[newmajority]

17. Umm... "Islamofascistland"

Because pResident Chimpy sez so!!111!!!