Wednesday, July 4, 2012

Five Options for the Judiciary of the United States

Justice has been shown to be blinded by political ideology and ambition in Washington. Let me propose some solutions for the House of Representatives to consider:

1. The House of Representatives introduces legislation to remove a Supreme Court justice with 2/3 approval of its members. The threat of even discussing removing a justice for cause will make them reconsider future decisions and their oath of office. There would be no impeachment process involving the Senate.

2. The House of Representatives introduces legislation to censure a Supreme Court justice for cause.

3. Congress formed the Department of Justice in 1870. Congress should eliminate the Department of Justice based on the actions of the attorney general: Voter Intimidation, Fast & Furious, Arizona Immigration laws. No federal crimes are prosecuted without a department of justice: state judiciary processes are not impacted. The attorney general office would still be intact to allow capital offenses to be prosecuted.

4. The length of appointment for a justice will be fixed at six years. Justices can be renewed by a simple majority vote of the Senate for consecutive appointments of six years not to exceed three consecutive terms for a maximum of 18 years.

5. The House freezes the budget of the Supreme Court. Page 16 of this PDF shows the budget of the Supreme Court from 2011 through 2022. Freezing their budget at 2011 levels through 2022 will save the country $158 million. Freezing the entire judicial system budget through 2022 will save $7.198 billion.

We should not forget the actions of five justices who substituted political ideology for their honor, oath and the Constitution.

David DeGerolamo

11 comments:

  1. Agreed that some system of restraint needs to be enacted - this 'ruling' regarding obamacare is just the most recent and egregious example of how they are substituting their political and personal ideologies for reasoned decisions based on the rule of law. I cringe every time I hear someone starting off with the words 'liberal' or 'conservative' branch of the court. Judges are supposed to be 'triers of fact' - if they cannot make the decisions regarding a particular case they must recuse themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I pick #3 and #5. That should pretty much take care of it.
    Miss Violet

    PS- First, good morning Brock. Hope Miss Dixie had a great BD.
    Alos, is this the hotlink thing you talked about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Also. Spelling does not engage until I have suffcient amount of caffiene on board. ;)

      Delete
  3. I pick #3 and #5. That should pretty much take care of it.
    Miss Violet

    Yes, looks like #4 is missing in action.:)
    =======
    PS- First, good morning Brock. Hope Miss Dixie had a great BD.

    Certainly did, Ma'am and wish y'all had been here. I could air express you half of the food left over and you wouldn't have to cook for a week!

    Alos, is this the hotlink thing you talked about?

    You done did it girl!:)
    ========
    Also. Spelling does not engage until I have suffcient amount of caffiene on board. ;)

    Don't feel bad. I took Dixie to homeschool bowling the other day and introduced myself to a new family as:

    How do you do, I'm Dixie's husband...brother...Father! They looked at me very strangely. Can't imagine why........:)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol! Oh, that's funny. We all have those days.
      Miss Violet

      Delete
  4. "...husband...brother...Father!"

    I've seen some communities where that wouldn't have even caused a raised eyebrow...

    ;oD

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYlJH81dSiw

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wait, let me get this straight. Conservatives have been waiting for months, hoping the Supreme Court would rein in the Congress's excesses in giving us Obamacare. And now, when SCOTUS didn't do as we'd hoped, David DeGerolamo thinks we can fix the problem by . . . using the *Congress* to rein in *SCOTUS*? Say what?! Congress can't fight its way out of a wet paper bag, and we can't use a corrupt government to fix a corrupt government.

    ReplyDelete
  7. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYlJH81dSiw

    How well I remember this.:)

    ReplyDelete
  8. David DeGerolamo thinks we can fix the problem by . . . using the *Congress* to rein in *SCOTUS*?

    He usually ends such pieces with the last box, but didn't this time for some reason. I do know he left out #4 originally, so maybe he was having a "...husband...brother...Father" day!:)

    ReplyDelete