PHILADELPHIA, Nov 18 (Reuters Legal) - New Jersey's Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a bid to recall U.S. Senator Robert Menendez, ruling that state law cannot be used to remove a sitting federal representative outside of scheduled elections.

"The court finds that ... the federal Constitution does not allow states the power to recall U.S. senators," Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote in a majority 4-2 opinion.

The Committee to Recall Robert Menendez, a group linked to the conservative Tea Party movement, wanted to recall the Democratic senator because of his support for policies including healthcare, immigration reform and cap-and-trade legislation to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

The court's decision was being watched by conservative activists seeking the recall of elected members of Congress in other states including Louisiana, North Dakota, and Colorado.

RoseAnn Salanitri, a spokeswoman for Recall NJ Inc, which led the court challenge, said the group will appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. "This is indeed a dark day in the history of this court," Salanitri said.

She accused the court of "judicial activism" and said the majority of the justices disregarded a 1995 amendment to the state constitution which established procedures for New Jersey citizens to recall, after at least one year of service, any U.S. senator or representative elected by the state.

The Committee to Recall Robert Menendez filed a notice of intention to recall the senator in September 2009 under the state's recall election law. The New Jersey secretary of state denied the committee's notice on the grounds that the federal Constitution is the sole legal authority that governs the qualifications and right to expel a member of Congress. The committee filed for emergency relief with the New Jersey Court of Appeals, seeking a temporary injunction and expedited review.

The committee's bid was upheld by the appeals court, but on Thursday it was reversed by the state's highest court, which found the state's recall law unconstitutional.

Afshin Mohamadi, a spokesman for Menendez, said the committee could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, but he believed the top U.S. court would not take the case.

"The chances that the U.S. Supreme Court would overturn a ruling upholding the Constitution are minuscule," he said, calling Thursday's ruling a defeat "for the Tea Party and its Washington-based, right-wing corporate backers."

Dissenting justices Roberto Rivera-Soto and Helen Hoens issued a stinging rebuke to the majority, accusing it of denying voters the right to criticize elected officials.

"In effect the majority sees the Senate as an institution immune from criticism ... an elitist institution the members of which should not have to be troubled by what the people they represent believe," the two justices wrote. "Today is indeed a sad and dark day in the history of this court."

Citizens in some states can attempt to remove local or state officials before the end of their term in office by holding a recall election. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, 18 states allow recall elections for state officials. Menendez is a federal lawmaker.

In 2003, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger ousted former California Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, in a recall election 10 months into Davis' second term.

The case, which was argued on May 25, is The Committee to Recall Robert Menendez from the Office of U.S. Senator v. Wells et al, Supreme Court of New Jersey, No. A-86. Marc Elias of Perkins Coie in Washington, D.C. argued the case on behalf of Menendez, and Angelo Genova of Genova, Burns & Giantomasi in New Jersey was listed on Menendez's briefs. Andrew Schlafly argued on behalf of the Committee to Recall Robert Menendez. Schlafly and Richard Luzzi of Oller & Luzzi in New York were listed on the committee's briefs.

(Reporting by Jon Hurdle of Reuters; Additional reporting by Terry Baynes of Reuters Legal)