Not so. Because of the de facto officer doctrine, Obama's removal from office would not result in the removal of his appointees. In any event, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in another eligibility case last month or so, and Kagan and Sotomayor did not recuse.
That was the Kerchner case, and the 2 justices were requested in writ to recuse themselves. They refused to and the writ was not granted.
Not so. Because of the de facto officer doctrine, Obama's removal from office would not result in the removal of his appointees. In any event, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in another eligibility case last month or so, and Kagan and Sotomayor did not recuse.
--------------------------------------------------------
I'm not so sure your opinion there on the de facto officer doctrine is a 100% shoe in.
"To satisfy the doctrine, the officer must be in the unobstructed possession of the office and discharging its duties in full view of the public, in such manner and under such circumstances as not to present the appearance of being an intruder or usurper."
http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/SUPCT/160/op92-113.txt
Barry has all the "appearance" of being an "intruder" to the office.