Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cain Requests That Justice Elena Kagan Recuse Herself from the Supreme Court’s Obamacare Hearing
Herman Cain web site ^ | 11/17/11 | Herman Cain/JD Gordon

Posted on 11/17/2011 12:29:05 PM PST by justsaynomore

Republican presidential candidate and businessman Herman Cain today requested that Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself from the upcoming Supreme Court hearing on Obamacare.

As a political appointee in President Obama’s Justice Department, Justice Kagan strongly advocated for the government takeover of health care and during the bill’s debate, then- Solicitor General Kagan actively supported a government-run system and sent a jubilant email to then-Justice Department colleague Laurence Tribe saying: ““I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing.”

“I request that Justice Kagan recuse herself immediately from hearing the Obamacare case,” Cain said. “Members of the highest court in the land should be impartial, strictly follow the Constitution and should not carry water for former employers in the White House.”

According to 28 USC 455, Supreme Court justices must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” and if they have at any time “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he or she “served in governmental employment.”

For More Information: J.D. Gordon, Vice President of Communications Friends of Herman Cain, Inc. media@hermancain.com


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2012; bounceback; cain; comebackcain; comebackkid; frontrunner; hermanator; hermancain; obamacare; reboundman; teflonman
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-124 next last
To: SoJoCo

Wow. Obviously I wasn’t aware of the details of the statute. You’re right. It’s both or neither. Then we’re back to square one, with one man (Kennedy) deciding the outcome.

Then we must win the presidency and the senate. Our way of life should not be dependent on the whims of one man.


61 posted on 11/17/2011 1:43:47 PM PST by cotton1706
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]




Click the Pic               Thank you, JoeProBono

Hang on, Gary!

Follow the Exciting Adventures of Gary the Snail!


Donate Monthly
Sponsors will pony up a sawbuck
For each New Monthly Donor

62 posted on 11/17/2011 1:44:07 PM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: justsaynomore

BREAKING NEWS: Perry says “Me too, and I will get my team to formulate a response that I can read later.”


63 posted on 11/17/2011 1:44:27 PM PST by montyspython (This thread needs more cowbell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK

Mrs. Clarence Thomas is not Clarence Thomas.

A wife does not have to have the same opinion as his wife. He has never said his opinion on this issue. He does not have to recuse.

She is knee-deep in it though- she has to.

There is going to be WAY MORE call from the left for Thomas to recuse than they will be before Kagan


64 posted on 11/17/2011 1:46:49 PM PST by Mr. K (Physically unable to proofreed <--- oops, see?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

” I am not sure how she is establishing some sort of new precedence. “ <<<’

I believe it is because she is a lawyer, and I think her guest was also. Together they seemed infomed on the standard for conflict of interest. Me? Haven’t a clue. Just surprised Cain seemed unaware of the Thomas’ question.
This is why I won’t be surprised if Cain goes silent as both sides will want this issue to go away. Mutual destruction is not a gain.


65 posted on 11/17/2011 1:46:59 PM PST by RitaOK (Rasmussen is the polling standard who owns the record on accuracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

” There is going to be WAY MORE call from the left for Thomas to recuse than they will be before Kagan. “ <<<

You make my point. Cain as a candidate may have opened up a can of worms, by his lack of awareness on the Thomas question. Either it will get very noisy now, or Cain will go silent on this, fast. Both sides will want this to go away.


66 posted on 11/17/2011 1:50:23 PM PST by RitaOK (Rasmussen is the polling standard who owns the record on accuracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel; RitaOK

I agree, RitaOK could be from the DUmmies.


67 posted on 11/17/2011 1:54:20 PM PST by federal__reserve (What matters in 2012 is jobs, jobs, jobs! Jobs kill unemployment, foreclosures & deficits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Fred

Check out the link for yourself at poster, #59.

Thomas and Kagan are at issue. Cain has stoked the conversation, seemingly unaware that Thomas is at just as much risk. He will be seen going silent fast. As will any other candidate jumping on this band wagon against Kagan.


68 posted on 11/17/2011 1:56:33 PM PST by RitaOK (Rasmussen is the polling standard who owns the record on accuracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: federal__reserve

You too missed the link at “#59?


69 posted on 11/17/2011 1:57:35 PM PST by RitaOK (Rasmussen is the polling standard who owns the record on accuracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: SoJoCo

(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;
(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv) Is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

All I see is that Thomas should recuse himself if and when she is called as a “material” witness (iv).

(iii)? What is her “substantially affected interest” (AKA-harm/gain standing)?


70 posted on 11/17/2011 1:59:40 PM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: federal__reserve; RitaOK

I wouldn’t go that far given time-in-service on FR but RitaOK is certainly pushing the emotional side as opposed to facts.


71 posted on 11/17/2011 2:01:30 PM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel
What is her “substantially affected interest” (AKA-harm/gain standing)?

Mrs. Thomas is the head of Liberty Consulting, an organization that has been lobbying against Obamacare. If the court strikes is down then her organization could benefit from it.

72 posted on 11/17/2011 2:02:22 PM PST by SoJoCo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK

You’re the one who needs a clue!

The situation with the Thomas’s is the norm in the Capitol. If everyone in government recused themselves because of what their spouses do for living, no one in Washington could ever vote.


73 posted on 11/17/2011 2:03:33 PM PST by SatinDoll (NO FOREIGN NATIONALS AS U.S.A. PRESIDENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro

Ok, Herman how about a bounty on illegals?

One vote here!


74 posted on 11/17/2011 2:10:28 PM PST by outhousepatrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: SoJoCo

In what way would Mrs. Thomas benefit? On a “regressive” extension, if ObamaCare is struck down, in what way would the Mrs. Thomas directly benefit?...credibility does not carry a monetary benefit unless proven post facto. Keep in mind, too, that she is not the organization, in principal. She is essentially a worker drone.

If my comments regarding EPA legislation benefits my employer, am I directly responsible for the benefit to my comapny that employs me to interpret and comment? Not until I am called as a “material witness”.

Same for Mrs. Thomas. If she receives a direct bonus/pay raise for her work in getting ObamaCare struck down, then yes she benfits. If she receives an annual bonus from the organization according to her merit in moving the group forward, is that really directly tied to the SCOTUS decision?


75 posted on 11/17/2011 2:11:36 PM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: SoJoCo

Oooops. My mistake. She, in fact, IS a principal in the organization.

I wait for more elucidation.


76 posted on 11/17/2011 2:12:45 PM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK

I have no doubt that Justice Thomas, if he is in any way connected with the case, will recuse himself. Kagan would would not necessarily do so. Good for Mr. Cain. He is our great dragon fighter! God be with him.


77 posted on 11/17/2011 2:13:21 PM PST by Paperdoll (On the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RitaOK

Is there any evidence that Justice Thomas is swayed by his wifes political activity?


78 posted on 11/17/2011 2:19:22 PM PST by proudpapa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Thanks, but sorry, I can’t stand Gingriches ten minute answers to simple qwuestions. my time is much to precious ot me. Just say no to Newt!


79 posted on 11/17/2011 2:25:10 PM PST by Paperdoll (On the cutting edge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Cletus.D.Yokel
In what way would Mrs. Thomas benefit?

let me repeat, Mrs. Thomas heads an organization that lobbies against Obamacare. The Supreme Court striking down the legislation would be a major victory for her group and would enhance its influence.

80 posted on 11/17/2011 2:40:13 PM PST by SoJoCo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-124 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson