Replies

Nothing requires Scalia to recuse, neither the rules of the SCOTUS or his speaking out on the issue.

The Code of Conduct for the Federal Judiciary includes this important item:

(6) A judge should avoid public comment on the merits of a pending or impending action, requiring similar restraint by court personnel subject to the judge's direction and control. This proscription does not extend to public statements made in the course of the judge's official duties, to the explanation of court procedures, or to a scholarly presentation made for purposes of legal education.
JUDICIARY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES: CODES OF CONDUCT

Scalia probably felt (or someone convinced him) that he had commented on the merits of the case. If so, it would appear that he was right to have recused himself. In the future, he'd best address in public only those issues that are not being actively litigated.

hat code is not applicable to the SCOTUS and it should not be. Abortion has been litigated continously for more than thirty years. The same for affirmative action. And for the "Wall of Separation". To expect SCOTUS justices to remain silent on said issues is nutty.

The result would be a star chamber.

On this issue, while Scalia will recuse himself on the First Amendment issue, he could decide whether Newdow actually had standing to bring his action in the first place. If Supremes determine that Newdow lacks standing, the court could overturn the 9th Circuit without even reaching the First Amendment issue.