# Removal of a Supreme Court Judge **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 2, 2009, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086 "2009-05-02T14:47:38Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/1 "2009-05-02T14:47:38Z")
Now I know that a Supreme can be [impeached](http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761574302_2/supreme_court_of_the_united_states.html) for “criminal or ethical lapses” but is there a process to remove one if (s)he just becomes incompetent and refuses to retire? Say one develops Alzheimer’s and refuses to leave? Are they removable and by what process? ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/2 "2009-05-02T14:59:52Z")
I would say insisting on continuing to serve with a disease like Alzhimers would itself be an ethical lapse worthy of impeachment. ---
**Author:** ![friedo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/8edcca/32.png) [@friedo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/friedo)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/3 "2009-05-02T15:01:31Z")
The only way to forcibly remove a Supreme Court justice is through impeachment and conviction. BTW, the only Supreme Court justice to ever be impeached was [Samuel Chase](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase). He was acquitted. ---
**Author:** ![C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@C\_K\_Dexter\_Haven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/C_K_Dexter_Haven)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/4 "2009-05-02T15:07:08Z")
The Master has covered this in an earlier column: [There goes the judge: How do we get rid of whacked-out judges? - The Straight Dope](http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2693/there-goes-the-judge) ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/5 "2009-05-02T15:07:59Z")
There were a number of justices who became senile or phsyically disabled. Pressure by other justices to resign was the deciding factor in each case. (Details provided on request; it’ll involve a lot of retyping of an offline text.) ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/6 "2009-05-02T15:25:07Z")
Thanks for the answers. Okay, so impeachment is the only way if they do not succumb to peer pressure. I don’t know that **Simplico** is correct. It may not be “unethical” as the individual may themselves not recognize the dementia and may in fact believe that others are imagining it or want him to quit for other reasons. They may even be paranoid. Obviously from Cecil’s column some have kept serving while a bit over-ripe in the past. Can they be impeached merely for mental incompetence? Cecil implies so but does not state that directly. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/7 "2009-05-02T15:57:02Z")
Despite the fact that there are purported limitations in the Constitution regarding the offences or conduct that can form the basis of impeachment, I suspect that any impeachment for any reason would be upheld on the basis of the political question doctrine. So I don’t think it’s really necessary to shoehorn the situation of a senile old coot into the specified language. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/8 "2009-05-02T17:56:51Z")
There is no mechanism for the appeal of an impeachment proceeding and result to a court of law anyway, **DSY**. Who exactly do you think would have the authority to review and “uphold” it? ---
**Author:** ![Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a587f6/32.png) [@Freddy\_the\_Pig](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freddy_the_Pig)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2009, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/removal-of-a-supreme-court-judge/495086/9 "2009-05-02T18:33:28Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Can they be impeached merely for mental incompetence? It has happened. The first judicial impeachment in American history involved the conviction and removal of District Judge [John Pickering](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pickering) for insanity. Despite Pickering’s obvious incapacity (which does not seem to have been disputed), the case had political overtones, since it served as a preliminary to the aforementioned Chase impeachment and Federalists wanted to establish as narrow a definition of impeachment as possible. Pickering’s conduct, while indefensible, fell short of a “high crime or misdemeanor”. On the other hand, he wasn’t demonstrating “good behavior”. The Senate voted 19-7 to give him the boot, as a few Federalists crossed party lines. As for appeals, [Judge Walter Nixon](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Nixon) sued to contest his removal and eventually appealed to the Supreme Court, on the grounds that the Senate had designated a committee to take evidence rather than having all 100 members conduct the full trial. The Supreme Court dismissed the case as a political question in _Nixon v. United States_, forever to be confused with the famous Watergate tapes case, _United States v. Nixon_.