Posted on 10/02/2011 3:05:54 PM PDT by Kaslin
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court hasn't even agreed yet to take the case questioning the constitutionality of the individual mandate -- the centerpiece of President Obama's health care law -- but already arguments are lined up to remove justices from trying to weigh in on deliberations.
Justice Elena Kagan's role in the Obama administration as it was formulating the legal defense for the health care law disqualifies her from participating in the decision, say groups who call the former solicitor general incapable of being objective. Kagan says she was not involved in developing the legal strategy of the Affordable Care Act, but opponents of the law have requested records of the administration's deliberation process to see who participated.
Conversely, liberal groups and some Democrats in Congress say Justice Clarence Thomas can't be jurisprudent because his wife worked for organizations that actively opposed the health care law. On Thursday, 20 House Democrats requested a federal investigation into whether Thomas broke federal disclosure laws by not listing his wife's pay on a disclosure form for 21 years -- even though her job at the time was no secret.
"The forms are simple and straightforward. Given that we now know he correctly completed them in at least five earlier years, it's hardly plausible -- indeed it's close to unbelievable -- that Justice Thomas did not understand the instructions," said Common Cause President Bob Edgar.
On Thursday, the Obama administration requested the court take up the case and deliver its verdict by June 2012, as Obama and his Republican opponent gear up for the fall campaign. That request got the backing of retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, suggesting that the court could be inclined to take it.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Trying to rig the courts like his National Socialist Democrat predecessor, FDR.
FUBO & FAD
I worry that Thomas will recuse and that Kagan will not. I also worry that the two will make a deal: "I'll recuse if you recuse" and then Kagan will back out after Thomas publicly says he will recuse. I put nothing past these power-hungry slimeballs.
I think 0bama and 0bamacare are finished not matter what the Supremes decide.
If they overturn it, the electorate will be all the more outraged that the Dems squandered so much getting this piece of crap legislation through...he loses.
If they uphold it, the PEOPLE are going to be even MORE motivated to head to the polls and elect those who WILL overturn it...he loses.
If anyone needs to recuse itself it it Kagan, not Thomas
Kagan is a solid vote for Commicare.
That is what the Dems want.
Kagan will not recuse herself willingly. They are “above” things like “conflicts of interest”.
I agree. If we can vote in enough Repubs in both Houses and the WH, then this travesty can be overturned now matter what the Supreme Court does.
“I suspect that the Court will strike down the individual mandate, and much of the rest will remain in tact.”
What the Rats forgot in their haste to pass this, was to write an exclusion clause into the bill. From what I’ve learned, if ANY part of it is overturned, the whole thing goes...they can’t save parts of it.
It’s true they did not put in a severability clause.
The problem is that there is ample precedent for the court implying severability even in the absence of such a clause.
I don’t agree with the practice, but it has been done before.
I don’t think they will do anything.
They didn’t uphold property rights, they didn’t sump all of Campaign Finance Reform when they had a chance (although a later case protected some free speech)
SCOTUS will not touch it I think
Kagan has already hinted she has no intention of recusing herself at Congressional hearings fer her confirmation saying she did not specifically work on the case law while she was Solicitor General.She need not have worked on the specific case law for her to have a conflict. She was in charge the strategy to defend the biggest piece of legislation the administration enacted.As such she has a conflict. Much like the madam of a brothel need not sleep with the customers to establish an interest in its survival.
KAGAN must recuse herself! Yeah! I know.
Kagan should recuse herself, if she has an ethical bone in her body, because of her work in writing the drafts of this monstrosity of a law. She cannot be impartial.
If this results in a 4-4 split in the judgment, so be it. A tie may not be a win, but it is no endorsement either.
A pox on the RINO’s and wimp republicans for not nixing Kagan’s nomination. Sotomeyer too for that matter.
If Justice Thomas recuses himself we might as well nullify the 19th amendment.
She’s on the court. She gets a vote no matter what. No matter how undeserving.
We owe a lot of pain and grief to the 19th.
How is working for the president for the healthcare the same as SUPPORTING groups that oppose it? There does the power lie?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
