Dear friends,
I have read through this thread, and believe with 36 years in Scouting and 20 years as a professional, that I must challenge a couple of statements made by one or more of the previous folks.
One is that rarely do any of us know all of the facts of a situation. If a council Scout executive becomes aware of some facts (or at least corroborated statements) warranting membership revocation, he/she may remove a member on behalf of the National Council. There is a detailed pamphlet called "Procedures for Maintaining Standards of Leadership" which has been in use for over 20 years, and has been carefully edited to cover most serious situations. Quite a bit of written documentation is required when the National Council removes an individual from the BSA.
In order to protect people from retribution, the executive does not normally disclose all information to aggrevied parties, and to my knowledge, aggrevied parties have no legal right to "all the information". Membership is a privilege, not a legal right.
However, an individual has the right to a review of the decision by three impartial regional volunteers (none of whom are part of the affected council), who review all of the documentation submitted by the Scout executive to the National Council. If there is any reasonable doubt as to the facts, the committee may interview any party to the facts to determine what the truth is.
If a Scout executive acted too hastily, or in error, or before relevant facts later became known, the regional committee has in some instances restored the individual to membership. This has happened several times, although in the great majority of cases, the regional committee sustains the judgement of the council Scout executive.
The other thing that needs to be said is that there is no official "removal for life" (although for serious pedophiles, that is practically the effect). People who have changed over time and demonstrated improvement in character have been reinstated.