Judicial Independence:
A fundamental principle of the judiciary is its autonomy. Judges should be able to render decisions based on their understanding of the law, free from the threat of retaliation. The act of impeachment in response to dissenting views poses a direct risk to this autonomy.
Separation of Powers:
The structure of the U.S. government is characterized by a clear separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. While impeachment is a power granted to the legislature, utilizing it to penalize judicial dissent blurs these boundaries and diminishes the judiciary’s function.
Rule of Law:
The rule of law mandates that legal rulings be grounded in established principles rather than influenced by political pressures. Impeaching judges for their legal interpretations jeopardizes the consistency and reliability of the legal system.
Dissent as a Vital Function:
Dissenting opinions play an essential role in legal discussions. They can reveal alternative viewpoints, identify weaknesses in majority rulings, and pave the way for future legal advancements. Curbing dissent hinders legal discourse and may result in stagnation.
Political vs. Legal:
Roberts distinguishes between political disagreements and legal interpretations. Judges are expected to focus on legal interpretations without facing political consequences for their decisions.
Impeachment’s Proper Use:
Impeachment is designed for addressing serious misconduct, such as “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors,” rather than for disputes over legal philosophy.