Article of Impeachment Against Associate Justice Torie

[bgwah]

Senators, articles of impeachment have been filed against Associate Justice Torie:

ARTICLE OF IMPEACHMENT AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE TORIE

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Having failed to participate in two consecutive rulings (Snowstalker vs the Midwest, Scott vs the Northeast), an article of impeachment shall be automatically placed before Senate in accordance with Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution and thus considered accordingly

Best regards,
VP Windjammer

Please discuss the merits of this indictment.

[President Tyrion]

Well, I suppose either active justice can answer this, but has Torie been so completely MIA as to be a burden to the court? Or, rather, if you would like to give a statement without any explicit opinion on the matter, can you name the last time you communicated with Torie?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

He's studying for the New York bar and is taking it next week just as I am. He made a public post about it in the forum community board. I'd hate to see him get impeached over this.

[Oakvale]

Well, I suppose either active justice can answer this, but has Torie been so completely MIA as to be a burden to the court? Or, rather, if you would like to give a statement without any explicit opinion on the matter, can you name the last time you communicated with Torie?

I won't go into that, but, in my case, the last I heard from Torie was in the early discussions on Snowstalker v. The Midwest, to the point where his opinion on the law was made clear (hence the unanimous opinion), in advance of his hiatus.

I did note that the decision in Scott v. The Northeast was unanimous, but given the de facto vacancy I was using that in the sense that me and Chief Justice bgwah were on the same page following our discussion of the case.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

If the honorable Pres. Duke is correct (and I'm sure he is), I don't think Justice Torie should be impeached over this. He's a good man.

[Adam Griffin]

We went through a whole redefining of the impeachment terms during the last SCOA inactivity controversy in 2013; we essentially moved the goal posts to save their jobs with the 21st Amendment. Now we're discussing doing it again? Unfathomable. The current law is the law and should be enforced by the letter. To my knowledge, Torie didn't even bother to post a LOA on this board (not that it's applicable).

[Napoleon]

If the honorable Pres. Duke is correct (and I'm sure he is), I don't think Justice Torie should be impeached over this. He's a good man.

This is the post he is talking about I think.

When one is in lock down studying for the Bar exam in NY about 10 hours a day, every day, while expected to service clients now and then, eat and sleep, and screw, and manage a ton of real estate, including managing from afar some substantial construction activity in Hudson, along with completing my delayed 1031 exchange and the sale of one leg of that transaction (thank heavens the sale of the house in Oregon that was part of the exchanged closed before the 180 day deadline), one I suppose could deem debatable as to whether or not one is alive, at least as to the issue as to whether that life is on Earth or in hell, but whatever.

You see, I mean, sure I have been a lawyer since rocks cooled, but does that mean that I know that a party admission by convention as to the Federal Rules of evidence is call "non-hearsay," even though it is hearsay (yes, I already knew that lucunae), but in the state of NY and its courts it is called hearsay but is admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule (as it should be, good for NY), and that a few states have the "agency" theory of felony murder, so that when a cop kills someone in the course of a felony, the perps are liable for that typically in most places, but not agency theory states because cops are not agents of the gang of perps the way an accomplice is if   the trigger man in their gang? F no, and the damn Bar Exam test delves into all of that. Sh*t sometimes you need to know four "languages" at once, the Model code rule, the majority common law rule, the NY rule, and the Federal courts rule. Just ducky baby. And then of course "they" (as in the the sadistic 60 year old committee of law professors who design the test with the aim of attempting to trick you any way they can so they can get a good "curve" of Bar Exam results), expect you to know all the time deadlines and means of alternative service where and when, and whether in is in state, or out of state, as to service of process in NY, as if your goal in life after passing the Bar was to become a full time process server. Boo! F them.

So I won't be around again until August - at all. You all are just are not as important to me as eating, sleeping, screwing, avoiding legal malpractice and massive financial waste - and yes, passing the NY Bar, and passing it the first time now, as in July, rather than later. Don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings, but that is the way it is. Heck I don't even know what has been happening politically, except with respect to some vague rumors that Iraq is falling apart, and Joe Biden's idea of partition back when may have been inspired genius, and that Thad Cochran got a sudden electric shock and miraculously arose from the dead refuting every law of gravity and nature that we thought had been so settled, that a judge could simply take judicial notice of it all.

And as a notice to the Cave, please have someone else attend to all my little reports stacking up. I just won't be dealing with them for about 35 days. And be kind. When in doubt, the Torie policy is "no action." Being a high school Vice Principal type running around with a paddle just isn't my thing.

The best to all of you btw. I hope you are all doing well. Pray for me. Thanks.

Steve

[Lumine]

I agree with President Duke and Senator Alfred in this, I don't believe there are enough merits for impeachment and should this be brought to a vote I am pretty sure I will be voting Nay.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would point out that whole purpose of the authomatic impeachment hearing was that such in and of itself would then motivate the posting of concurrences at the end of hearings as a minimum activity standard.

Here is something else that I would note, the Justices have made a grave mistake in reducing themselves to just that minimum and no more. For instance, if Torie was avaialbe in the first cited case at the beginning, public postings could be used to justify not impeaching him at this point, even if he technically didn't post a concurrence in that or the subsequent case listed.

This gets me back to first point, an automatic impeachment proceeding does not necessarily mean automatic impeachment. It becomes basically a trial where the Senate has to be convinced that he should not be impeached with the initial presumption at least being that the Justice should be impeached. My advise to the Justices is from this point forward, to post as much as is comfortable in the case threads such as to demonstrate a "presence", that could be use as a disuading measure if they end up missing two conccurences and end up in this kind of circumstance.  This was what I had in mind when I first voted for the Expectations Amendment.

[TNF]

It is absurd not to vote for impeachment here. Torie is clearly not doing his job. The fact that you may like Torie personally is not at issue here. What is at issue is that he declined to give notice of his absence and has not been involved in the judicial process. I will be supporting his impeachment on those grounds.

[windjammer]

Well, I obviously want to avoid discussing about it because after all, I have a lawsuit against me and if I give my opinion, it could be badly interpreted.

However, I believe I can give the facts:

Associate Justice Torie has indeed participated to the Snowstalker vs the Midwest case, by asking questions to me during the court case. He has however not participated to the final decision.

However, he's gone since a long time and hasn't taken a leave of absence. If he had taken a leave of absence, there wouldn't be this article of impeachment.

[Napoleon]

So what do you guys expect to happen when bgwah and oakvale disagree?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

How extensive was Torie's involvement in the Snowstalker v. Midwest case mentioned above?

According to both VP Windjammer and Justice Oakvale, he participated in what I guess could be considered our equivalent of oral arguments. Where there other aspects of this participation in the mentioned case?

[President Tyrion]

Based on the responses here, I don't think reasonable grounds exist to vote against the impeachment. I think Yankee has the right of it, in that the Justice is impeached until proven otherwise. While Torie is clearly busy, he is also not doing his job.

[Napoleon]

So what do you guys expect to happen when bgwah and oakvale disagree?

Does anyone know how the tie would be broken?

[Simfan34]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.slate.com/what_happens_in_ascotus_tie.html

Something like this, I imagine.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Based on the responses here, I don't think reasonable grounds exist to vote against the impeachment. I think Yankee has the right of it, in that the Justice is impeached until proven otherwise. While Torie is clearly busy, he is also not doing his job.

I really don't like the way that is worded. I know what you mean, in that it states agreement with voting to impeach being the default position, but as worded here implies some rather nasty unconstitutional things if such is not clearly understood. We will make the determination by the vote.

Which gets me back to my previous question, was there any other instances of involvement in the Snowstalker case by the Associate Justice?

[Napoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.slate.com/what_happens_in_ascotus_tie.html

Something like this, I imagine.

That doesn't really translate to atlasia nor answer my question. If a decision is tied 1-1, what happens? There's too many risks I fear, to have a supreme court seat vacant. Opebo never should have been banned, he was so reliable.

[President Tyrion]

I'm not sure what the discussion period is here, but I call for a vote.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

The bar exam is finished now. I finished mine Wednesday, and the New York bar ended the same day. Torie should be back. I'd hate for us to impeach him now, but if he remains missing, I can see the reason to do so.

[bgwah]

Senators, the vote is now open.

[Adam Griffin]

Aye

[President Tyrion]

Aye

[bore]

Aye feel I have no choice.

[TNF]

Aye