Lifetime service is subject to the “during good behavior” requirement. Congress has never defined or enforced this requirement, perhaps because there has been no need. But there is a need now. “Good behavior” is a lower standard than impeachment and doesn’t require criminal behavior to be triggered. Absenteeism, habitual drunkenness, deciding cases by coin flipping or consulting an Eight Ball, ethical lapses and, of course, substituting personal views for genuine legal reasoning count and should be grounds for removal from office.
Trouble is, if Republicans and insurrectionists take over, removing carefully constructed guardrails requiring proof of their duplicity and illegitimacy or inappropriateness for their role will work to the advantage of insurrectionists who hate Democracy.
Must be proven in court or in Congressional hearings under subpoena, so they are legally libel for lying. The next Trump or Trumpist regime (he's not going away, folks, even if Trump passes away, he will be a martyr and they will find themselves a Trump 2.0) will misuse this for a complete rout of all their 'enemies'.
They would love this, exploit it shamelessly, being able to claim anyone who is not Trumpy enough for them is 'misbehaving' and poof, gone.
“Free of all this,” meaning literally the cushiest, most secure and most powerful job in the country? That you can have as long as you want, with lifetime salary and benefits when you choose to retire? Or meaning the crushing weight of the expectation that you at least don’t express open hostility to this country and its system of laws that you’re sworn to uphold?
They just cannot bear the thought that they’re not victims. Not for a single minute.
We don't need to become a "God-ly" nation again because there are many who 1) don't believe in God and 2) don't pay attention to God in the first place. What we NEED to do is become a nation of common decency and respect for all. It's not that hard. Just stop being jackasses.
With any luck, the Grim Reaper will knock on the Alito and Thomas front doors during a second Biden term. Then the hope is Roberts will retire (in shame) after losing his conservative majority. We will then have a 6-3 liberal majority with Jamie Raskin as Chief Justice.
Jay have you considered becoming a legal advisor to President Biden? The issue of the corruption on the Supreme Court MUST be addressed and resolved. Impeachment is in order immediately before more damage is done to our democracy!
Republicans with NEVER vote to remove Alito or any other conservative justice on the court. So, once again, expanding the court is really the only option to for change. Yes, sure, they can still be impeached, but the Senate will never convict them. Democrats always have to expend "political capital" to correct republican corruption or mismanagement, which feeds into the narrative that we are always "out to get" conservatives.
Agreed 100%. I like this piece, but leading readers to hope for impeachment and removal feels like manipulation when the bar is so high in the Senate, an inherently anti-majoritarian institution. There will be at most 1 or 2 Republican defectors, and maybe not even that, for such a counter-historical vote.
Republican politicians are actively afraid of their base, which has become extremely vindictive and well-armed. The Right views this sort of fear in legislators as somehow healthy for the republic, as if President Washington should have cowered before James McFarlane, commander of the Whiskey Rebellion, and conceded to the tax rioters.
Then it would be similar to Trump's two impeachments in terms of effectiveness. Just a political act, with polarized takes from either side of the political divide.
Is there really any pretention at this point that Alito and Thomas, or any other members of SCOTUS, are not political actors? Sotomayor was raked over the coals by Republicans for even suggesting during her confirmation that judges have backgrounds and views that might affect their judgments. In other countries, I don't think there is this presumption that judges are perfectly neutral arbiters.
While Roberts' differing response to this undercover mole is astutely neutral, he is absolutely a political actor. His history with the VRA during the Reagan administration directly precedes his patient work to gut the VRA as chief justice. He prefers a slower pace than his fellow partisans because it is less likely to threaten the project of reversing the Warren court's accomplishments.
I imagine there's going to be a lot of right-wing rage over the conniving female duplicity of Windsor, but they didn't seem to have any problems with it when Amy Coney Barrett was testifying for her Supreme Court seat and said she'd respect established court precedent WRT Roe V Wade. Not that I expect conservatives to be anything but blatantly unashamed of their hypocrisy, they're fighting a jihad after all.
Greg Olear from the Prevail substack said about Alito likely complaining about being secretly taped, "If there’s anyone who doesn’t deserve the courtesy of privacy, it’s the smug misogynist who authored the Dobbs decision."
Why is it "female" duplicity? Do you think that women own that characteristic more than men? What about the duplicity of the men on the Court? I would recommend that you edit your comment.
Conservatives and traditional gender roles steeped in misogyny go hand-in-hand. Therefore a woman who is duplicitous, the way Windsor could be argued to behave, is especially evil when compared to masculine deception often being glorified as clever political power plays.
Of course there's also the conservative love affair with hypocrisy. As I already said, they had no problem with ACB being duplicitous about respecting Roe V Wade in her Supreme Court confirmation, same with Gorsuch, a man. Because it served their jihad.
ACB is allowed to be duplicitous because she's doing it to advance Christian Dominionism and that is a Good Thing whereas Windsor is an evil reporter that is working against Christian Dominionism so that is a Bad Thing and I have no doubt that there will be calls to sue her or arrest her or worse.
Actually, why did you miss the direct comparison between two women in the original comment, which served as its own demonstration of conservative regressive values and hypocrisy, but then when I did write an explanation, you complained (incorrectly, btw) that it was *man*splaining? Everyone except you seemed to understand my original comment just fine without the crutches.
Because I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that a woman would not use a phrase that has been weaponized against us, particularly against any woman who would dare to use strategy or her smarts. I would expect a woman to not throw micro aggressions around like that. Do you identify as male?
I am a woman. One who prefers the freedom to employ language tools such as sarcasm, satire, and irony without being required to performatively apologize for *any and all* "triggering" content employed in their use, and include an equally performative explicit disclaimer of said contents as Not My Actual Opinion, because I trust whomever is reading it to not require handholding at every word. Your tone-policing is as condescending as you find my "man"splaining. I'm sure anyone in the perpetually-online conservative readership would find this comment chain hilarious on several levels, including me calling out its absurdity right here, hence my mentally checking out of this farce.
I guess I didn't frame my comment carefully enough. My comment is specific to your criticism of the use of "female duplicity" by Chaos Goblin. Her comment was explicit to that context and her anticipation of the nature of Right Wing reactions. She simply didn't put the phrase in quotation marks. I feel you overreacted.
Beware the females of the species…Ginni Thomas and Martha Ann Alito sound like real pieces of work. Makes me almost feel sorry for their hubbies, except they’re just as repugnant. Guess they deserve each other, but this nation doesn’t.
I do not feel sorry for either Aliar or Thomas with their choice in who they married. Both the husbands and the wives are probably feeding on and off their respective spouses opinions and actions. Ginni and Martha Ann are twin sisters of different mothers.
I’m sorry Mia. But wasn’t it in WICKED that we learned that the Wicked Witch was framed by an authoritarian fake wizard? Incidentally, Trump is a reincarnation of this fake wizard known for his trumpery. 👅👀. ♐️♐️♊️
Waiting for the election and hoping for the result necessary to finally bring the corrupt judges to some kind of responsibility is not enough. Look at the damage they had already caused. And they still have plenty of time to cause more. As long as the possibility of their impeachment or any other ramifications remains vague and uncertain, they'll just continue doing what they are doing.
Many thanks, Jay. Yours was the last in a long line of truth-tellers who wrote about (and I read) this issue with the Alitos. Yours was the first that explained to me clearly the justice's bias such that he does not belong on the Court. As for the Mrs., all I can say is holy moly!
Lifetime service is subject to the “during good behavior” requirement. Congress has never defined or enforced this requirement, perhaps because there has been no need. But there is a need now. “Good behavior” is a lower standard than impeachment and doesn’t require criminal behavior to be triggered. Absenteeism, habitual drunkenness, deciding cases by coin flipping or consulting an Eight Ball, ethical lapses and, of course, substituting personal views for genuine legal reasoning count and should be grounds for removal from office.
Trouble is, if Republicans and insurrectionists take over, removing carefully constructed guardrails requiring proof of their duplicity and illegitimacy or inappropriateness for their role will work to the advantage of insurrectionists who hate Democracy.
Must be proven in court or in Congressional hearings under subpoena, so they are legally libel for lying. The next Trump or Trumpist regime (he's not going away, folks, even if Trump passes away, he will be a martyr and they will find themselves a Trump 2.0) will misuse this for a complete rout of all their 'enemies'.
They would love this, exploit it shamelessly, being able to claim anyone who is not Trumpy enough for them is 'misbehaving' and poof, gone.
Ah, Magic 8 Ball!
“Free of all this,” meaning literally the cushiest, most secure and most powerful job in the country? That you can have as long as you want, with lifetime salary and benefits when you choose to retire? Or meaning the crushing weight of the expectation that you at least don’t express open hostility to this country and its system of laws that you’re sworn to uphold?
They just cannot bear the thought that they’re not victims. Not for a single minute.
We don't need to become a "God-ly" nation again because there are many who 1) don't believe in God and 2) don't pay attention to God in the first place. What we NEED to do is become a nation of common decency and respect for all. It's not that hard. Just stop being jackasses.
With any luck, the Grim Reaper will knock on the Alito and Thomas front doors during a second Biden term. Then the hope is Roberts will retire (in shame) after losing his conservative majority. We will then have a 6-3 liberal majority with Jamie Raskin as Chief Justice.
It would be awesome if Jamie Raskin was Chief Justice.
He is certainly qualified.
I was hoping maybe president.
Raskin as Chief Justice works for me!!
Retire in "vergogna"? ;)
Jay have you considered becoming a legal advisor to President Biden? The issue of the corruption on the Supreme Court MUST be addressed and resolved. Impeachment is in order immediately before more damage is done to our democracy!
I would be honored and a bit horrified if asked, TBH. It’s a job with few happy elements to it.
You don’t need stress!
Republicans with NEVER vote to remove Alito or any other conservative justice on the court. So, once again, expanding the court is really the only option to for change. Yes, sure, they can still be impeached, but the Senate will never convict them. Democrats always have to expend "political capital" to correct republican corruption or mismanagement, which feeds into the narrative that we are always "out to get" conservatives.
And remove the filibuster to do it!
Excellent point!
13 Districts 13 Justices
Yes, 13 for 13, plus a 20-year term limit.
Let’s make it 18, but with ya.
Agreed wholeheartedly!!
Agreed 100%. I like this piece, but leading readers to hope for impeachment and removal feels like manipulation when the bar is so high in the Senate, an inherently anti-majoritarian institution. There will be at most 1 or 2 Republican defectors, and maybe not even that, for such a counter-historical vote.
Republican politicians are actively afraid of their base, which has become extremely vindictive and well-armed. The Right views this sort of fear in legislators as somehow healthy for the republic, as if President Washington should have cowered before James McFarlane, commander of the Whiskey Rebellion, and conceded to the tax rioters.
Removal is not something I believe is possible
Then it would be similar to Trump's two impeachments in terms of effectiveness. Just a political act, with polarized takes from either side of the political divide.
Is there really any pretention at this point that Alito and Thomas, or any other members of SCOTUS, are not political actors? Sotomayor was raked over the coals by Republicans for even suggesting during her confirmation that judges have backgrounds and views that might affect their judgments. In other countries, I don't think there is this presumption that judges are perfectly neutral arbiters.
While Roberts' differing response to this undercover mole is astutely neutral, he is absolutely a political actor. His history with the VRA during the Reagan administration directly precedes his patient work to gut the VRA as chief justice. He prefers a slower pace than his fellow partisans because it is less likely to threaten the project of reversing the Warren court's accomplishments.
Nor the end of the filibuster unless we retain the Senate and even then it makes me very nervous.
Although I enjoy seeing some Supreme Court members exposed for the partisan hacks that they are, nothing will be done and the Justices know it.
I’m sure Clarence Thomas is grateful to Alito for directing the heat away from his crimes.
I’m unwilling to say nothing will be done! If Dems retake the House we should demand an impeachment inquiry.
Fingers crossed
I imagine there's going to be a lot of right-wing rage over the conniving female duplicity of Windsor, but they didn't seem to have any problems with it when Amy Coney Barrett was testifying for her Supreme Court seat and said she'd respect established court precedent WRT Roe V Wade. Not that I expect conservatives to be anything but blatantly unashamed of their hypocrisy, they're fighting a jihad after all.
Greg Olear from the Prevail substack said about Alito likely complaining about being secretly taped, "If there’s anyone who doesn’t deserve the courtesy of privacy, it’s the smug misogynist who authored the Dobbs decision."
Why is it "female" duplicity? Do you think that women own that characteristic more than men? What about the duplicity of the men on the Court? I would recommend that you edit your comment.
Sigh.
Conservatives and traditional gender roles steeped in misogyny go hand-in-hand. Therefore a woman who is duplicitous, the way Windsor could be argued to behave, is especially evil when compared to masculine deception often being glorified as clever political power plays.
Of course there's also the conservative love affair with hypocrisy. As I already said, they had no problem with ACB being duplicitous about respecting Roe V Wade in her Supreme Court confirmation, same with Gorsuch, a man. Because it served their jihad.
ACB is allowed to be duplicitous because she's doing it to advance Christian Dominionism and that is a Good Thing whereas Windsor is an evil reporter that is working against Christian Dominionism so that is a Bad Thing and I have no doubt that there will be calls to sue her or arrest her or worse.
I really can't believe I needed to explain that.
I really can't believe you just used their terminology without apology or explanation and summed it up with mansplaining. Just saying.
Mansplaining?
Why did you assume I'm male?
Actually, why did you miss the direct comparison between two women in the original comment, which served as its own demonstration of conservative regressive values and hypocrisy, but then when I did write an explanation, you complained (incorrectly, btw) that it was *man*splaining? Everyone except you seemed to understand my original comment just fine without the crutches.
Because I assumed (perhaps incorrectly) that a woman would not use a phrase that has been weaponized against us, particularly against any woman who would dare to use strategy or her smarts. I would expect a woman to not throw micro aggressions around like that. Do you identify as male?
I am a woman. One who prefers the freedom to employ language tools such as sarcasm, satire, and irony without being required to performatively apologize for *any and all* "triggering" content employed in their use, and include an equally performative explicit disclaimer of said contents as Not My Actual Opinion, because I trust whomever is reading it to not require handholding at every word. Your tone-policing is as condescending as you find my "man"splaining. I'm sure anyone in the perpetually-online conservative readership would find this comment chain hilarious on several levels, including me calling out its absurdity right here, hence my mentally checking out of this farce.
It's "female duplicity" because that's how the Right will frame her actions.
Thank you, Judith. That was all that needed to be said.
I guess I didn't frame my comment carefully enough. My comment is specific to your criticism of the use of "female duplicity" by Chaos Goblin. Her comment was explicit to that context and her anticipation of the nature of Right Wing reactions. She simply didn't put the phrase in quotation marks. I feel you overreacted.
Thank you for letting me know.
I find Alito's view that one group has to "win" (and it better be his side) alarming and disturbing.
What he is saying is that there is only One Way and it's aligned with Christo-Fascists.
All those who claim that the United States was intended to be a Christian nation are dead wrong and dangerous because they are so convinced about it.
When Democrats have a majority, Alito and Thomas have to go.
It's imperative for the health of the nation.
We must make it hard for them to stay.
These are abhorrent, evil people. HELLLOOOOOO Dick Durbin??? 🙄
Dick’s response has been a bit…limp.
I saw what you did there
He’s in a 🥒 (pickle) for sure 🤔
LOL 😂😂😂
Shh, don’t disturb him - he’s taking a nap with Garland.
November is coming
☝️
Beware the females of the species…Ginni Thomas and Martha Ann Alito sound like real pieces of work. Makes me almost feel sorry for their hubbies, except they’re just as repugnant. Guess they deserve each other, but this nation doesn’t.
Bullshit bigotry.
I do not feel sorry for either Aliar or Thomas with their choice in who they married. Both the husbands and the wives are probably feeding on and off their respective spouses opinions and actions. Ginni and Martha Ann are twin sisters of different mothers.
Yeah, having a hard time deciding which of them is worse--male or female. It's a tough call
Didn't realize that freedom of religion was a compromise.
I would naturally think that preference to one or a few religions would be the compromise
Wicked Witch of the West vibes.
Hide your doggos.
I’m sorry Mia. But wasn’t it in WICKED that we learned that the Wicked Witch was framed by an authoritarian fake wizard? Incidentally, Trump is a reincarnation of this fake wizard known for his trumpery. 👅👀. ♐️♐️♊️
The complexities.....
- he may be a reincarnation of thrice-chewed cud clumped and undigested by even the most strident bile...
Hmmmm. Love your response.
As Joyce Vance notes, we're in this together....😉
Waiting for the election and hoping for the result necessary to finally bring the corrupt judges to some kind of responsibility is not enough. Look at the damage they had already caused. And they still have plenty of time to cause more. As long as the possibility of their impeachment or any other ramifications remains vague and uncertain, they'll just continue doing what they are doing.
An election result that culminates in their removal isn’t likely. But one that results in an investigation and education of the public is very doable.
They make me miss beheadings. ;-)
Many thanks, Jay. Yours was the last in a long line of truth-tellers who wrote about (and I read) this issue with the Alitos. Yours was the first that explained to me clearly the justice's bias such that he does not belong on the Court. As for the Mrs., all I can say is holy moly!