Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Me vs. The Supremes – Part IX

If I was right, and impeachment is only allowed in three instances by the People to Congress – (i) Treason, (ii) Bribery and (iii) High Crimes and Misdemeanors – then what was to be done with “misbehaving” Supreme Court Justices? The Framers well knew the import of using the phrase “good behavior” in Article III, §1 and thus clearly left that power with the People. Hence, I could sue to remove those misbehaving Justices . . .

“Good behavior tenure existed in England as regards many officers for centuries prior to the adoption of our Constitution. The conditions to which this tenure was subject had been considered in a long line of decisions. It was recognized that one might forfeit an office held during good behavior by misconduct in office, neglect of duties, the acceptance of incompatible office. . .”. Shartel, p. 88. Indeed, it was the common law practice in England to allow private citizen to sue for forfeiture of a judge’s office. “In England, the Crown was obligated (presumably by custom) to lend its sanction to forfeiture cases when a private citizen complained of misbehavior.” 4 Matthew Bacon, A New Abridgment of the Law, 416 (London, Worrall 3rd Ed. 1768).

Additionally, “[T]here in no lack of precedent for the proposition that courts can exercise jurisdiction to declare judicial and other offices forfeit for misconduct or neglect of duty.” Shartel, p. 83. Plainly, “There is an extensive body of evidence, stretching from England to the colonies to independent America, indicting that good-behaviour tenure was understood to terminate upon a judicial finding of misbehavior. . . . Most importantly for our purposes, all agreed that misbehavior could be determined only by a judicial process.” Prakash and Smith, p. 107-108.

Last, as recognized by Berger, “English law provided a proceeding to forfeit the office by a writ of scire facias. An act “contrary to what belongs to his office” resulted in forfeiture o the office as appears in the Abridgments of Viner and Bacon and in the Digest of Cromyns, which faithfully reflect the cases.” Berger, p. 132.

Thus, it was upon this factual underpinning that I filed my Third Lawsuit seeking the forfeiture of the offices of Justice of the United States Supreme Court held by Defendants Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr., Stephen G. Breyer, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony M. Kennedy, John G. Roberts, Jr., Antonin Scalia, David Hackett Souter, John Paul Stevens and Clarence Thomas for their misbehavior in office in violation of Article III, §1of the United States Constitution.

That is when something stinky hit the fan . . .


Post a Comment

Play nice!