Staff Reports
Representative Steve Cohen’s move to file six articles of impeachment against Chief Justice John Roberts is the latest political theater from the left. It is loud, dramatic, and built mostly to score points. But it also raises a real question: are we willing to turn impeachments into tools for settling policy scores? The short answer should be no.
The filing and what Cohen says
Cohen, the Democrat from Memphis who is leaving Congress after his district was redrawn, accuses Chief Justice John Roberts of making the Supreme Court a partisan force. His six articles claim the chief justice has issued “arbitrary, unexplained, and inconsistent” decisions, mishandled recusal and financial disclosures, and even helped shield powerful people from accountability. Cohen points to recent rulings as evidence and says the court’s credibility is at stake.
What cases Cohen leans on
The congressman cites two big Supreme Court rulings to make his case. One decision limited when states must draw additional majority‑minority districts. Another set a broad immunity standard for presidents in a major opinion written by Chief Justice Roberts. Cohen reads those outcomes as proof the court favors certain political ends. Critics on both sides can debate the law, but using impeachment as the remedy is a massive leap.
Politics, motive, and timing
Let’s not pretend timing doesn’t matter. Cohen’s Memphis‑based district was sliced in a special session after the court decision he cites. He also announced he won’t run again. That makes this filing feel less like a principled crusade and more like a swan song protest. Impeachment is supposed to be for true misconduct, not a congressional sop for losing a map fight.
Why this is reckless and unlikely to succeed
Impeaching a Supreme Court justice is rare for a reason. It risks turning the judiciary into an arm of party politics. The Constitution allows removal, but the bar is high: a House majority to impeach and two‑thirds of the Senate to convict and remove. With House Republicans holding the majority and no widespread co‑sponsorship of Cohen’s articles, this filing looks like a symbolic gesture, not a path to removal. Still, the spectacle does dangerous work: it normalizes the notion that judges can be booted for disagreeing with lawmakers.
Final thoughts
Representative Cohen has every right to complain about the Supreme Court. He also has every right to retire from public life. But turning impeachment into a response for court decisions sets a bad precedent. If we want a stronger, less political court, the answer lies in clearer ethics rules, better confirmations, and legislation — not headline‑grabbing impeachment bids. Washington has enough petty theater. We do not need to make the Supreme Court the next stage.
