Calling for the Impeachment of Chief Justice John Roberts - Steve Cohen, TN-9 (D)
Representative Cohen charges Chief Justice John Roberts with being "understood as biased: with decisions designed to benefit Republicans at the expense of representative government, seemingly contradictory and unexplained orders, and a pattern of ethical breaches that raises questions about the role of the wealthy."
The articles include:
Article I: "Failure of Stewardship: Politization of the Court" — accuses Roberts of allowing the court to become "a political instrument" through its handling of election and redistricting cases.
Article II: "Violation of Oaths: Entrenchment of Minority Rule" — argues Roberts enabled partisan gerrymandering and weakened voting rights protections through decisions including Rucho v. Common Cause and Louisiana v. Callais.
Article III: "Violation of Oath: Empowering the Rich Over the Poor" — criticizes Roberts' role in campaign finance rulings, including Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC, alleging the decisions favored wealthy interests.
Article IV: "Violation of Oath: Unaccountable Executive Branch" — focuses on Roberts' opinion in Trump v. United States, arguing the ruling on presidential immunity undermined constitutional checks and balances.
Article V: "Violation of Oath: Arbitrary Decisions" — accuses the court of increasingly relying on unexplained emergency docket rulings that the resolution says lack "meaningful analysis."
Article VI: "Violation of Oath and Laws of the United States: Failure To Recuse" — alleges Roberts failed to recuse himself from cases involving law firms connected to his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, who worked as a legal recruiter.
Citations/Further reading: https://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-john-roberts-impeachment-steve-cohen-11984709
https://cohen.house.gov/media-center/enewsletters/calling-impeachment-chief-justice-john-roberts
As a casual observer, many users of this subreddit and general political analysts seem to agree with at least articles I, II, IV and V. Especially given the recency of Callais and the impending ruling for Alabama's maps, the court appears to have become increasingly political under Robert's leadership.
My discussion points are as follows:
-What is the minimum charge you would consider for impeaching a Chief Justice? If you do not have differing criteria for impeaching a Chief Justice vice Justice, please explain the lack of distinction.
-How would you determine "good behavior", were you given license to interpret without being bound judicial or legislative history?
For clarity, I would like to state that the submission of a text post for this topic was endorsed by /u/Longjumping_Gain_807 in this comment: https://old.reddit.com/r/supremecourt/comments/1ttnjwg/rsupremecourt_weekly_in_chambers_discussion_060126/op54wos/
Edit: One addition I didn't note in my post, I think this is the first Chief Justice to have impeachment articles filed against him. Does this affect your view of Robert's conduct?