Who still wants to know who paid Brett Kavanaugh’s $92,000 country club balance, $200,000 in credit card debt, and $1,200,000 mortgage, buying themselves a Supreme Court justice — and the 5th vote to overturn Roe v. Wade?
@tristansnell
When is #MerrickGarland going to investigate corruption at the #SCOTUS ?
Well, the independence of the judiciary makes that tricky.
We don't want presidents to be going after the branch that has such an important role in overseeing the president.
Instead, this is where impeachment comes in.
It's really up to the people we elect to Congress, not the AG, to investigate allegations against Supreme Court justices and impeach when that's warranted.
@TCatInReality no, that's not how the US federal government is designed, with its system of separation of powers.
It is the duty of the president to faithfully execute his office, but beyond that, the DOJ's investigations are subject to prosecutorial discretion and bound by limitations that prevent it from breaking the independence of the judiciary.
The conflicts of interest loom large there.
@volkris @tristansnell
Again, I call BS.
The DOJ regularly investigates and indicted Congresspeople. Menendez and Santos being the most recent.
Of course there is prosecutorial discretion, but there is no free pass just because you're a member of another branch of government.
A key difference is that when Congress passes laws that apply to its own members they are agreeing to it.
When the president prosecutes Congress under the authority of laws that Congress itself has passed that doesn't violate the separation of powers since Congress itself is directly involved in that process.
But for the president to prosecute the ones who are intended to be the major check on presidential power?
You don't see that conflict of interests?
@volkris @tristansnell
The US has a 3-part government where 2 exist to check the other. POTUS and SCOTUS check Congress. POTUS and Congress check SCOTUS. And SCOTUS and Congress check POTUS.
OF COURSE, Congress's laws apply to SCOTUS and POTUS has obligation to uphold...even on SCOTUS members.
While some conflict of interest, it is mitigated by:
- Congress ability to investigate and fund
- Judicial processes that have great control over prosecutions
There can be no legal free passes!
@volkris @tristansnell
In fact, ANY federal prosecution self-evidently requires alignment of all three branches:
- Laws by Congress
- Prosecution by the admin
- Grand juries and courts run by Judiciary
So, again, I call BS on this simplistic notion that DOJ should not investigate/prosecute obvious corruption in any part of the gov.
@TCatInReality no you're completely wrong about how the checks and balances work in the US government.
It's not two versus one. It's individual mechanisms by which each branch acts on its own to check the others.
For example, Congress holds the impeachment power on its own requiring zero cooperation from the executive branch.
It would be pretty bad if we allowed the branches to team up against each other, as that would imply all sorts of conflicts of interests.
So no, that's not how the US government is designed or how it operates.
@volkris @tristansnell
That's not what I said at all. I said each branch has two others to check it.
We don't seem to be getting anywhere. You're not going to change my mind that SCOTUS doesn't get a free pass on criming or that the executive has a role in checking that abuse through standard DOJ/judicial processes.
Have a nice day.
@TCatInReality Right but you're obviously wrong with your opinion since the US was built on a platform that valued and established judicial independence.
This is basic civics, basic elements of the US government design.
Have a nice day, I guess. But what you're saying is not accurate.
@volkris @tristansnell
I support the Senate Judiciary investigation of the #SCOTUS
But I call BS on the Justice Dept. If there are crimes, it is the duty of the DOJ to investigate - and if sufficient evidence, indict and prosecute. There is no judicial hall pass for criming.