It's not just a Steven Seagal movie.
“Yes we can” is why.
Kagan is a liberal. They get to play by different rules because the republicans in congress say so with their silence.
It’s been obvious from day one, she won’t recuse herself, and who can force her to do what’s right?? Just one more evil.
You actually think the Republican leadership has enough testosterone to do something about violations of the law...? It wouldn’t look bi-partisan....
Short of impeachment there is ‘no controlling authority’.
It's not just a Steven Seagal movie.
“So why is no one raising sand about THIS particular violation of the law?”
I AGREE!!! Justice Elana Kagan should have ‘recused’ herself from this case!!
Since she was Solicitor General for the Obama Administration during the drafting of ObamaCare this is...... Definitely a Conflict of Interest!!
Solicitor General Elena Kagan and famed Supreme Court litigator and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe, who was then serving in the..... “Justice Department”,...... had an email exchange in which they discussed the pending health-care vote, according to documents the Department of Justice released
“I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing,” Kagan said to Tribe in one of the emails.
The March 2010 email exchange between Kagan and Tribe raises new questions about whether Kagan must recuse herself from judging cases involving the health-care law that Obama signed—and which became the target of legal challenges—while Kagan was serving as Obama’s solicitor general and was responsible for defending his administration’s positions in court disputes.
According to 28 USC 455, a Supreme Court justice must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” The law also says a justice must recuse anytime he has..... “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” ......while he “served in governmental employment.”
How Convenient!!!
Indonesian Go Home!
Liberals/demoRats could care less about the law when it advances their goals. It was brought up before, but Kagan must recuse herself. Kagan is a liberal, thus Kagan will not recuse herself, since it advances the liberal goals.
Just tossing this out there... What if she waits until the conference vote on Friday, and as the most junior (?) Justice she votes last, she says, “Because of my involvement in the administration’s construction of the law, I am recusing myself.”
I almost think she may do this, especially if she sees that the vote is going clearly either for or against Obamacare, and that her vote isn’t needed. If all the other justices’ votes show a clear decision for or against the bill, she can recuse herself, saving her loss of legitimacy for another day and showing that she isn’t what we all think she is.
If, however, the vote is tied, I fully expect she will vote to save the bill, and ethics be damned; thus, our opinion about her will be proven.
What legal recourse is there against a SC justice? Anyone know?
Because politicians - Democrat and Republicans - care more about their jobs than about our country.
Bump.....
Nice find. Details are important. Applicable statutory citations have power. Good work.
She violates the law of aesthetics too.
Woof.
Not a laywer, but not sure if this law applies to Supreme Court Justices... this may be to federal judges. Clearly Kagan has no business hearing this case, but not sure if this law applies.
PING = LATER REF