To: RitaOK
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.” I'm confused. Where does that rule invoke a "spouses clause" even when said spouse is not or has not "served in governmental employment."
You rest on the "rule of emotion" rather than the "rule of law".
45 posted on
11/17/2011 1:23:41 PM PST by
Cletus.D.Yokel
(Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
To: Cletus.D.Yokel
Phone GRETA. She disagrees with you, as did her guest.
47 posted on
11/17/2011 1:25:19 PM PST by
RitaOK
(Rasmussen is the polling standard who owns the record on accuracy.)
To: Cletus.D.Yokel
Phone GRETA. She disagrees with you, as did her guest.
48 posted on
11/17/2011 1:25:59 PM PST by
RitaOK
(Rasmussen is the polling standard who owns the record on accuracy.)
To: Cletus.D.Yokel
Where does that rule invoke a "spouses clause" even when said spouse is not or has not "served in governmental employment." Paragraph b clause 5, section iii. Link
Mrs. Thomas is head of an organization that may benefit if Obamacare is ruled unconstitutional.
59 posted on
11/17/2011 1:42:20 PM PST by
SoJoCo
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson