8
8
0
High crimes and misdemeanors.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and other Democrats arrested near the Supreme Court during abortion-rights protest
Any bets on when Speaker Pelosi commences the impeachment hearings?
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and other Democrats arrested near the Supreme Court during abortion-rights protest
Any bets on when Speaker Pelosi commences the impeachment hearings?
MSN
Posted from msn.com
Democrats
Supreme Court
Government
Politics
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 8
4
4
0
Note to all on the argument if congressional members can be 'impeached".
Impeachment: A charge of misconduct made against the holder of a public office.
The United States CONSTITUTION (Article I, Section 5, Clause 2) provides that "Each House may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."
Call it it impeachment or whatever you want - Expulsion is congressional impeachment.
Impeachment: A charge of misconduct made against the holder of a public office.
The United States CONSTITUTION (Article I, Section 5, Clause 2) provides that "Each House may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."
Call it it impeachment or whatever you want - Expulsion is congressional impeachment.
(4)
(0)
4
4
0
they all should be censured and expelled from congress but the drunk lush Pelosi will never allow it
(4)
(0)
3
3
0
Article I, section 5 of the United States Constitution provides that "Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member." Actually easier than an impeachment. However, Pelosi will NEVER bring anything against what little power support she has left. Mayhaps, if it becomes a GOP majority, something might happen. I doubt it - but it should.
It is a violation of Federal Law, specifically Title 18, Section 1507 of the U.S. Code, which was enacted in 1950. Under this law, it is illegal to picket or parade in front of a courthouse or a judge’s home "with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge." But, of course, a judge may disagree with the plain text of the law. <smh/>
It is a violation of Federal Law, specifically Title 18, Section 1507 of the U.S. Code, which was enacted in 1950. Under this law, it is illegal to picket or parade in front of a courthouse or a judge’s home "with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge." But, of course, a judge may disagree with the plain text of the law. <smh/>
(3)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
As SCOTUS has already ruled on Dobbs, it can be argued that there was NOT an attempt to influence the judges (justices). To my knowledge they currently have no abortion cases under consideration.
While I would disagree with that argument, the burden is on prosecution, not defense. And I think prosecution would have a hard time PROVING intent to influence.
While I would disagree with that argument, the burden is on prosecution, not defense. And I think prosecution would have a hard time PROVING intent to influence.
(3)
(0)
SFC Ralph E Kelley
SSgt (Join to see) SFC Casey O'Mally Its also a fact that the Democrats controlled both the House of Representatives and the Senate in 1950. Yessiree - The Democrats passed and enacted USC Title 18, Section 1507 against vigorous Republican objections. It's almost like ... Karma.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google