You said — “If there was a problem, it would be with Justice Scalia, not Dr. Taitz. But Scalia didn’t really discuss the details of the case with her, just procedural matters, it would seem.”
Well, I would expect Scalia to do no more than that. I would certainly hope so... :-) It was the lawyer that I saw as the problem...
—
And then you said — “On the other hand, Dr. Taitz’ adversary in the case, Obama, has socialized with almost all the SCOTUS justices on at least two occasions. Is that not just as much, or even more, of a “problem”? No one knows what was discussed between Obama and his staff, on the one hand, and the justices on those occasions.”
Hey, I think that Orly could have asked Scalia out for drinks and they could both “shoot the breeze” with a group of people. No problem there...
The problem I see is asking questions about the very case you personally have (as a lawyer) to the *very judge* who is going to hear your case... LOL...
And, as far as Obama socializing, as I said, that’s fine. Orly could socialize too, but *definitely not( discuss the case which is going before the judge...
One would have to discuss matters of the case to be in violation of the Ex Parte rule. There is no Obama NBC case in front of SCOTUS when Orly spoke with Scalia. However, when Obama visited the Supreme Court in the middle of January, cases where on the docket about Obama's Natural Born Citizenship issue, Ex Parte was more in question.
Orly: " I want to know if they will hear Quo Warranto and if they would hear it on Original Jurisdiction, if I bring Hawaii as an additional defendant to unseal the records and ascertain Obama's legitimacy for presidency."
Taitz's question was more of a hypothetical question and received a hypothetical answer from Scalia.
And LoL!