Can the Court’s decision be considered “bad behaviour”?

Article III. Section. 1. of the Constitution of the United States:

“The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.” (emphasis supplied)

There exists precedent for impeaching a Supreme Court Justice. Thomas Jefferson requested articles of impeachment against Justice Samuel Chase, who was impeached, but acquitted by the Senate.

Inasmuch as the House of Representatives must present articles of impeachment and the Senate must convict by a two-thirds majority, it’s impractical to believe we could realize such a result. Nevertheless, I have tilted at windmills before and, at times, it is the only way to begin a movement for change.

Clearly, the Hobby Lobby case is another in a long line of cases that have been decided by the kind of judicial activism most of those who favored the decisions decried and abjured in many of their writings and during their confirmation hearings, which makes them guilty of perjury in my eyes.

Give it some thought. Call it a BHAG or a stretch goal.