Judge May Keep Sheriff Joe Conviction Despite Trump Pardon

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Both scare me. We have separation of powers and checks and balances for a reason. The 3 brances are supposed to be equal, and the executive and judicial branches should not have fiat powers.

They have never and will never be equal.

True they are separate; however, the Founders insured the Congress, the closest representatives to the people and states, is the strongest as it can remove any from the other branches. Executive is next as it controls the bureaucracy and the military.

The Judicial by design is made the weakest.  The only power they get is via acquiescence from the other branches.

[The_Reader_David]

Why/how does a court have that power?

Because the supposedly coequal branches of the Federal government have deferred to the courts for so long that they've forgotten how to read the plain meaning of the Constitution for themselves and, in the case of Congress, forgotten that judicial overreach can be understood to be a "high crime or misdemeanor" in the original meaning of the phrase.  One impeachment of a judge for legislating from the bench would probably do the trick, but there is no desire to do that on the left since the Federal bench advances the left's agenda more reliably than elections do, and no will to do it on the right, either out of a misplaced conservative deference to precedent or the foolish desire to curry favor with the media and the Washington social circuit.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

They have never and will never be equal.

True they are separate; however, the Founders insured the Congress, the closest representatives to the people and states, is the strongest as it can remove any from the other branches. Executive is next as it controls the bureaucracy and the military.

The Judicial by design is made the weakest.  The only power they get is via acquiescence from the other branches.

You still miss my main point, an overwrought executive is just as dangerous as an overwrought judicial branch.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Because the supposedly coequal branches of the Federal government have deferred to the courts for so long that they've forgotten how to read the plain meaning of the Constitution for themselves and, in the case of Congress, forgotten that judicial overreach can be understood to be a "high crime or misdemeanor" in the original meaning of the phrase.  One impeachment of a judge for legislating from the bench would probably do the trick, but there is no desire to do that on the left since the Federal bench advances the left's agenda more reliably than elections do, and no will to do it on the right, either out of a misplaced conservative deference to precedent or the foolish desire to curry favor with the media and the Washington social circuit.

Only fifteen federal judges have ever been impeached, and the Senate has only voted to remove but 8.

In reading about them, it appears most are removed for kickbacks and the like rather than wrong usage of judicial power.

I would certainly like to see a federal judge who brazenly impugns the judiciary power removed from the bench.  Until then, our best hope is to not let them onto the bench in the first place to cause havoc.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

You still miss my main point, an overwrought executive is just as dangerous as an overwrought judicial branch.

I agree, but an out of control Executive is actually worse as he controls the vast bureaucracy and military.

Judicial can be simply ignored as they have limited enforcement power of their decisions and must rely upon compliance.

I will say though, that an Executive only has power for 8 years whereas a bad judge can remain in place for decades.

[Sanguine]

Because the supposedly coequal branches of the Federal government have deferred to the courts for so long that they've forgotten how to read the plain meaning of the Constitution for themselves and, in the case of Congress, forgotten that judicial overreach can be understood to be a "high crime or misdemeanor" in the original meaning of the phrase.  One impeachment of a judge for legislating from the bench would probably do the trick, but there is no desire to do that on the left since the Federal bench advances the left's agenda more reliably than elections do, and no will to do it on the right, either out of a misplaced conservative deference to precedent or the foolish desire to curry favor with the media and the Washington social circuit.

That's about it.

[Suppressed]

You still miss my main point, an overwrought executive is just as dangerous as an overwrought judicial branch.

I think some here like the idea of a king.