Judges and justices can already be impeached for misconduct. And be charged with violations and crimes.there is already an appeals process for questioning judges' decisions. there is already the confirmation process to make sure unqualified slugs don't become judges. the checks and balances already exist.

A new office isn't necessary unless we want to introduce congress-style witch-hunting in the judiciary, which would not only undermine judicial credibility, it would also make it harder for judges to do their jobs. The credibility of the judiciary should not be undermined.

Why should they? They have everything to gain and nothing to lose by doing to the judiciary what they did to the media. They are "working the ref" to ensure that every time judges makes decisions, they are thinking about the political implications and worrying about the headlines and the effect on their careers. If the right can actually achieve congressional oversight over sitting judges, we will see left of center judges being challenged for minor ethical violations, and they will know that if they decide cases the "wrong" way, congress will be checking their finances VERY carefully. If you want to map the trend, just look at what has happend to the media, where liberals act like conservatives just so they won't be criticized for being too liberal.

I was about to post the same. I find it outrageous that congress wants to investigate the judicial branch when the senate and house are so clearly failing to police their own colleagues AND that if congress believes that there is such a problem in the judiciary then perhaps they should examine their own choices when they acquiesce to the judicial appointments.

Somehow, I don't believe the proposed judicial oversight will pass judicial review.

What I do find interesting is the suggestion that "Republican politicians like John Cornyn and Tom DeLay could tone down their vitriolic, anti-judge rhetoric".

Umm, Grieve doesn't like the message hence the messengers should shut up? Does he think he's the president?

If this proposal were to some how even get to the floor of the House or Senate the United States of America and our Constitution are in a real crisis.

The reason for all of this call for oversight on the Judicial Branch comes from the religious wing of our country. As a Christian I have no problem religion in our society and I think that having religion and believing in God is a path to lead a good life.

That does not however mean that our legislators have the right to impose their morality and way of life as rooted in religion by proposing ways to control a branch of government that since the landmark case of Marbury vs. Madison determines the law of the land.

The next thing that might happen is a proposal to repeal the Establishment Clause of the Constitution so that the freedom of religion will no longer have meaning.

These Senators have clearly forgot why America was founded in the first place, the reason, because it is not right to persecute anyone who has a different belief than yours and to also impose your beliefs on someone else. Their reason (fraud and ethical violations) for this proposed legislation are a complete obfuscation of the real reasons these two highly conservative republicans want this measure. If they have a real case for this measure then there has to some form of precedent to show that fraud and ethical violations have happened in this branch of government.

If this legislation is passed an almost theocratic lock has taken hold of our country, violating the principles that founded our country.

So, the bill being proposed is supposed to create an office to deal with financial misconduct by judges? Hmm...For the life of me, I can only think of 1 instance of a judge being accused of financial misconduct. Of course, he's sitting on the Supreme Court now. That would be, of course, Justice Alito, who refused to recuse himself from cases involving mutual fund companies that he was invested in.

So, aside from Justice Alito's misconduct, which Republicans are apparently all good with, where's the huge scandals?

This is obviously another way for Republicans to harrass and intimidate judges that they don't like.

Why do Republicans hate the Constitution?

" there are rules against using the Soviets or the Nazis as points of comparison in political dialogue, even when the analogies are entirely apt."

This is tired and wrong. Godwin's rule applies to Nazi analogies that are hyperbolic, not to ones which are fitting. We need to be pointing out the truth to people who are wearing blinder to the point that only such comparisons help them see the situation.

The far right in this country, in fact, has links right back to Trotsky - Neocon refers to 'new' conservative, some of whom are converted far leftists who bring us the worst of combinations, right-wing values and communist tacticts.

Ignoratio, before you endorse this regime creating such an office, consider its program at the CIA with Porter Goss purging - you have Mary McCarthy, a relative liberal, investigated and gotten rid of ten days before her retirement, with widespread media stories that she leaked the illegal wiretapping, when she denies that and there is no evidence she did it. Do you feel sure that such a new office will be evenhanded in its investigation of judges, when set up by this regime? Before you answer, remember their dishonest and dangerous rhetoric that it's the judges who are the ones ignoring the law, and how a little intimidation to keep them in line is a good idea.

Have you seen the kinds of judges (and Justices) Bush has been putting on the federal bench lately? We could certainly use a lot of oversight these days.

I recommend we begin by impeaching the Appeals Court nominees and sitting Associate Justice who ruled on cases in which they had a financial interest.

If you can prove any of the so-called "liberal activist" judges out there broke serious ethics rules on the bench, too, I for one won't object if you throw them out along with the "strict constructionists" who did the same.