Skip to comments.Justice Elana Kagan violates the law!
Posted on 03/29/2012 7:11:42 PM PDT by Bigun
According to Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 of the U.S. Code, justices must disqualify themselves in cases where they have served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser, or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.
As solicitor general of the United States, Justice Elena Kagan served as the head of an office responsible for formulating the Obama administrations legal defense of its domestic agenda priority Obamacare.
“Yes we can” is why.
Kagan is a liberal. They get to play by different rules because the republicans in congress say so with their silence.
It’s been obvious from day one, she won’t recuse herself, and who can force her to do what’s right?? Just one more evil.
You actually think the Republican leadership has enough testosterone to do something about violations of the law...? It wouldn’t look bi-partisan....
No one can force her but she can sure as heck be impeached!
Short of impeachment there is ‘no controlling authority’.
Personally I don’t give a damn what it looks like!
I’m going to be on the phone to MY congressman’s office tomorrow morning about it and I’m not hanging up until I get an answer!
“So why is no one raising sand about THIS particular violation of the law?”
I AGREE!!! Justice Elana Kagan should have ‘recused’ herself from this case!!
Since she was Solicitor General for the Obama Administration during the drafting of ObamaCare this is...... Definitely a Conflict of Interest!!
Solicitor General Elena Kagan and famed Supreme Court litigator and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe, who was then serving in the..... “Justice Department”,...... had an email exchange in which they discussed the pending health-care vote, according to documents the Department of Justice released
I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing, Kagan said to Tribe in one of the emails.
The March 2010 email exchange between Kagan and Tribe raises new questions about whether Kagan must recuse herself from judging cases involving the health-care law that Obama signed—and which became the target of legal challenges—while Kagan was serving as Obama’s solicitor general and was responsible for defending his administrations positions in court disputes.
According to 28 USC 455, a Supreme Court justice must recuse from any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. The law also says a justice must recuse anytime he has..... expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy ......while he served in governmental employment.
Indonesian Go Home!
if she has to be an active member of a state bar somewhere have a resident of that state file a grievance with her state bar
Are you sure??? I hope you are. Who would impeach her??
Last Saturday at the Road to Repeal rally Kagan’s refusal to recuse was mentioned often. And it was the topic of the sign I held that day.
But of course as a liberal she is allowed to be a hypocrite.
WE should be raising unshirted HELL with our congressional representatives over this and not stop doing so until they do something about it!
So we will expect the Republican members of the House of Representatives to issue Articles of Impeachment sometime before the Supreme's verdict is rendered in June.
Or has some widespread gelding of Congress occurred while we weren't looking?
It won't happen unless WE demand it!
Liberals/demoRats could care less about the law when it advances their goals. It was brought up before, but Kagan must recuse herself. Kagan is a liberal, thus Kagan will not recuse herself, since it advances the liberal goals.
Just tossing this out there... What if she waits until the conference vote on Friday, and as the most junior (?) Justice she votes last, she says, “Because of my involvement in the administration’s construction of the law, I am recusing myself.”
I almost think she may do this, especially if she sees that the vote is going clearly either for or against Obamacare, and that her vote isn’t needed. If all the other justices’ votes show a clear decision for or against the bill, she can recuse herself, saving her loss of legitimacy for another day and showing that she isn’t what we all think she is.
If, however, the vote is tied, I fully expect she will vote to save the bill, and ethics be damned; thus, our opinion about her will be proven.
that made me snort so hard I believe I’ll have a nosebleed. Congressional Geldings...... new name for Republicans; how apt.
She has already actively participated in oral arguments and needs to have articles of impeachment drawn up against her RIGHT FREEKING NOW!
What legal recourse is there against a SC justice? Anyone know?
Because politicians - Democrat and Republicans - care more about their jobs than about our country.
Yes! Impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors!
Congressman Alcee Hastings form South Florida was once a federal judge but was impeached for taking bribes. I can and should be done in this case as well!
Then we very definitely need some new politicians!
Agree - wonder if anyone has the cojones to actually start the process....
I doubt it unless WE stand up on our hind legs like MEN and DEMAND that it happen!
“who can force her to do whats right?”
“What legal recourse is there against a SC justice? Anyone know?”
It’s called “impeachment.”
If Republicans get a significant majority in Congress she should be impeached. But were that to occur, would the leadership have the stones to do it? Heck no.
Where is John Roberts on this? He should read the law to the stupid liberal.
Appointed by the first black President. Who is going to vote impeachment? Nobody.
Roberts could force her to recuse.
No-balls Boner sure won’t.
Nice find. Details are important. Applicable statutory citations have power. Good work.
She violates the law of aesthetics too.
this case is the very definition of conflict of interest for her. She has a vested interest in seeing this case come out one way or another.
Why everyone in the media is not on top of this is just more proof on the pile of evidence of their uselessness.
I’ve been saying this for a year, this election will be as much a referendum on the media as it will be on the horrible job the guy they’ve been protecting and promoting for the past four years.
If there was any integrity in the J schools, they would use the past 12 years as a lesson on what not to do, but I think they’re too far gone.
I spoke at length with my congressman’s Chief of Staff this morning about this. He is quite clear as to it’s importance to me. It is my hope that others will do the same all over this land.
Her participation in this decision is the fault of congressional republicans. They are all letting us down.
The “Che” tattoo is a nice touch ...
“I spoke at length with my congressmans Chief of Staff this morning about this. He is quite clear as to its importance to me. It is my hope that others will do the same all over this land.”
I wrote to my Congressman; but, I have not spoken to him.
Not a laywer, but not sure if this law applies to Supreme Court Justices... this may be to federal judges. Clearly Kagan has no business hearing this case, but not sure if this law applies.
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.