> Investigation and disbarment would be just symbolic act
It would force facts onto the record. That, in turn, forms the groundwork for future investigations, including and up to charges (against, in all likelihood, folks who paid commissions with the intent of paying a bribe) and impeachment.
Investigation and disbarment would be just symbolic act.
The U.S. Constitution does not actually require a Supreme Court Justice to be a licensed attorney. Disbarment would have no effect for his work.
> Investigation and disbarment would be just symbolic act
It would force facts onto the record. That, in turn, forms the groundwork for future investigations, including and up to charges (against, in all likelihood, folks who paid commissions with the intent of paying a bribe) and impeachment.
I always assumed that in the early 1800s there were probably a few who had no legal education but according to Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_law_schools_attended_b...Of course your point stands, the only qualification for a justice is nomination by POTUS and confirmation by the senate.
It's very sad to see the US, already a Kleptocracy, start to show signs through open conspiracy, of becoming a pure Mafia state.
So?!? Why is this on HN?
Because it's interesting. That's the only criteria if you read the Guidelines. I'm a fan. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html