#3 is beyond the pale. None of us want to live in that world.
#2 is completely unreasonable at this point. Judge tenure is not subject to political review. Nothing short of a criminal conviction should be enough to remove him.
No. If we had ironclad evidence he was guilty of rape or murder, we still wouldn't and shouldn't vacate his previous work.
That's not how the system works and it's not how the system should work. Should people be able to appeal, if they can show that he judged those cases inappropriately? Sure.
But the idea that a criminal case is never closed because we might find dirt on the judge is awful.
What information has come out that leads to #3?
ReplyDelete#3 is beyond the pale.
ReplyDeleteNone of us want to live in that world.
#2 is completely unreasonable at this point. Judge tenure is not subject to political review. Nothing short of a criminal conviction should be enough to remove him.
Perjury seems a pretty good reason to remove someone from the court; it's unreasonably difficult to be a judge from a federal prison.
ReplyDeleteThat the perjury regards being a habitual rapist suggests we should also vacate his previous work; this man cannot represent the US.
No. If we had ironclad evidence he was guilty of rape or murder, we still wouldn't and shouldn't vacate his previous work.
ReplyDeleteThat's not how the system works and it's not how the system should work. Should people be able to appeal, if they can show that he judged those cases inappropriately? Sure.
But the idea that a criminal case is never closed because we might find dirt on the judge is awful.