SENATE STANDING COMMITTEE: Judiciary (Check and Balances Amendment)

[opebo]

...through their inappropriate political activities, these Justices have lost the right to serve on this Court.

Utter nonsense - I've only voted.

Justices Bgwah and Opebo have involved themselves in political debates, and taken harsh tones far beyond what is appropriate for members of the Court.

I defended myself when attacked in regards the court!  Are we expected to sit like dodos and wait to be made extinct?

[opebo]

You're expected to abstain from personal attacks, from insulting your opponents for attempting to "politicize" the Court, and Bgwah was actively involved in the debate over the legalization of eating dogs.  That's unacceptable, and it's inappropriate.

I'm not so expected, nor is it unacceptable, nor is it inappropriate, politicizer.  You're merely loading on your personal petty tastes and resentments as if they were some constitutionally stipulated criteria - they're not.  Show a little humility and respect both for the constitution and our respective offices.

[opebo]

• What, in your view, are sufficient grounds for the impeachment of a Justice of the Atlasian Supreme Court?

Proven unlawful conduct.
 

• What are sufficient grounds for the impeachment of any federal official?

The same.

[opebo]

I have a simple question.
Are long delays like in NCYankee vs. Atlasia are expected to happen again or it was a one-off occurence due to various concurring issues which shouldn't normally happen again?

It is not a normal occurrence and I for one would like the opportunity to see that it doesn't happen again.

Keep in mind that a delay is not impeachable conduct.

[opebo]

With all of this in mind, I think it's worth approaching this process with some doubts about what the Atlasian meaning of "impeachment" really is. If it's really more of a recall process, or some kind of recall/impeachment hybrid, than a desire to "shake up" the Court (or even blatantly political reasons) would seem to be rationale enough for an individual Senator or citizen to vote in favor of impeachment.

Here's the question: Why is this interpretation of Article I, Section 2 incorrect? Can you cite any precedents in Atlasian history that argue in favor of your interpretation of the proper use of the impeachment process?

The term 'impeachment' is used in the Atlasian Constitution.  The definition of 'impeachment' is 'unlawful conduct'.  The process stipulated is thus not a recall - it is precisely what it says it is: impeachment, and thus can only be constitutional if applied in a case of unlawful conduct - not because of political disagreements or other minor complaints.

[opebo]

I however think than if a Justice involved into lobbying/public campaign for or against a bill or an idea (like bgwah with dog meat), he should recuse himself should a case about that law reach the Court.

Are the Justices are in agreement with my statement?

No, not necessarily, as I feel confident I would be capable of ruling on the constitutionality of a law (such a ban of the consumption of dog-meats) regardless of my opinion of the law itself. 

[opebo]

Speaking of 'unnecessary delays', perhaps it is time we impeach Senator Benny for his sloth-like response.