The Los Angeles Times has a surprisingly good editorial on Congressman Sensenbrenner's initial step toward possible impeachment of Judge Manuel Real. Unlike the knee-jerk reaction we have seen elsewhere, assuming that those Wascally Wepublicans are once again attacking the independence of the judiciary, the Times recognizes that there was a real and outrageous abuse of power here, and the judiciary's self-policing mechanism has failed miserably. See Judge Kozinski's dissent for more.

On one important point, though, I believe the editorial is mistaken. It states there have probably been no "high crimes or misdemeanors" here, apparently assuming that phrase means acts designated as crimes in preexisting statutes. It does not mean that. See Story, Commentaries on the Constitution §§ 403-405 (1833); Schmitt & Bessette, What Does "High Crimes and Misdemeanors" Mean? (1998). Under the original understanding of this phrase, the deliberate abuse of power by a judge who grabs control of a case and issues patently illegal orders in gross disregard of due process of law is an impeachable offense.