- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Precedent for mentally incapacitated Justice?
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:25 am
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:25 am
What is the precedent or law for handling a mentally incapacitated Justice? Where are the requirements written and are they upheld?
I don't want this to turn into a thread of people wishing her death, but I am genuinely curious what the law has to say about a Justice who cannot be present to fulfill his/her obligation to the court.
I don't want this to turn into a thread of people wishing her death, but I am genuinely curious what the law has to say about a Justice who cannot be present to fulfill his/her obligation to the court.
6
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:26 am to ibldprplgld
Clarence Thomas is doing fine.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:26 am to ibldprplgld
Lifetime appointment. Impeachment.
It is that simple.
It is that simple.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:26 am to SleauxPlay
Racist
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:27 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Lifetime appointment. Impeachment.
It is that simple.
Yep. In the past, most people had honor and would resign if they couldn't perform their duties.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:28 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Lifetime appointment.
Is she alive?
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:29 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Lifetime appointment. Impeachment.
What qualifies as lifetime? Are they granted indefinite leave from the court if they want? If one is on life support, is that considered alive?
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:33 am to SlackMaster
Be nice, Hank’s notorious RBG sweater just came in from Prime
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:34 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Lifetime appointment. Impeachment.
It is that simple
It really is. this is a great example of how the founders could not anticipate just how scummy future politicians would be what you're saying something because it's not like they were a bunch of saints
But I don't think it really occurred to them that a party would keep an incapacitated judge in office intentionally
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:34 am to SleauxPlay
quote:
Clarence Thomas is doing fine.
Glad you feel comfortable enough with your racism to express it openly on a message board.
You should get with BMY and talk about your shared hatred of certain peoples...
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:36 am to ShortyRob
quote:
It really is. this is a great example of how the founders could not anticipate just how scummy future politicians would be what you're saying something because it's not like they were a bunch of saints
But I don't think it really occurred to them that a party would keep an incapacitated judge in office intentionally
Probably too medical advancements. I'd be surprised if they foresaw medically induced comas and life support as a means of extending someones "life"
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:37 am to ibldprplgld
quote:
Probably too medical advancements. I'd be surprised if they foresaw medically induced comas and life support as a means of extending someones "life
True. But I think their basic oversight is that they would have assumed that dignified people wouldn't even want to stay in a position when they were incapacitated
Make no mistake. If Ginsburg is out of it now but being maintained it is something she wanted
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:38 am to ibldprplgld
Who says she is mentally incapacitated? She is physically ill, but I haven't heard anyone comment on her physic as l ability.
If she cannot do her job, I'm sure she will retire. Her temporary absence from the bench does not prevent her from doing her job.
If she cannot do her job, I'm sure she will retire. Her temporary absence from the bench does not prevent her from doing her job.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 8:40 am to ShortyRob
quote:
Make no mistake. If Ginsburg is out of it now but being maintained it is something she wanted
Unfortunately, I don't disagree. She owes herself and her loved ones more than that if true.
I'm just curious if she is in a coma how long they can keep it up before a decision has to be made on her seat.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 9:09 am to ibldprplgld
The last time the question about her physical/mental state arose they released that ridiculous exercise video. This time.....not a sighting or a statement from her nor her showing up for work.
She could easily make an appearance....she hasnt, for anything including her job....
She could easily make an appearance....she hasnt, for anything including her job....
Posted on 1/29/19 at 9:12 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Lifetime
Define "lifetime"... better yet, define "life"...
Posted on 1/29/19 at 9:18 am to trinidadtiger
quote:
This time.....not a sighting or a statement from her nor her showing up for work.
Sh missed two weeks of oral argument (11 cases, I think). Justice Rehnquist missed 44 case arguments when he was ill earlier this century.
quote:
She could easily make an appearance....she hasnt, for anything including her job....
Neither did Rehnquist. And, after those two weeks of missed arguments, there is not another conference until Feb. 15, so there is no "public" court appearance for her to have until then.
I get all the speculation, but this isn't the Court's first rodeo.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 9:18 am to The Maj
IMHO she is in a coma where the democrats plan on keeping her until 2021.
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:30 am to bird35
quote:
IMHO she is in a coma where the democrats plan on keeping her until 2021.
This also assumes the conservative court members would just "go along" with it.
She still has to vote on cases, and you think they are just going to accept a note or something for her vote?
This post was edited on 1/29/19 at 10:31 am
Posted on 1/29/19 at 10:47 am to ibldprplgld
I am pretty sure there are no requirements beyond what is in Article III. The only way someone ceases to be a SCOTUS Justice is death, resignation, or impeachment and removal.
There isn't a 25th Amendment for Justices, nor can the other Justices remove like Congress can.
There isn't a 25th Amendment for Justices, nor can the other Justices remove like Congress can.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News