Tag Archives: US Constitution

A Little Lawyer Talk

Most people likely have no idea who John Flannery is, even though he’s a fairly well-known, former Federal Prosecutor. I know him from his frequent appearances on The Beat With Ari Melber. Ari is fond of pointing out that John is a bit of a doppelganger for Robert Redford. If you’re interested, here’s his biography at the firm of Campbell Flannery, where he is a senior partner.

John likes to take walks in the morning and record his thoughts about current events, with his primary focus on politics and the law. This is a short video where he discusses Trump’s attempt to hold on to power, as well as the progress of the pandemic we’re suffering from. I think John’s insights are invaluable and quite interesting. Three minutes and fifty-nine seconds of usefulness. Take a listen.


Can We Impeach Roberts & His Cronies?

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

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. 


%d bloggers like this: