Justice Kagan - Fingers and Toes Are Crossed Today! (sent entitled Email day of Obamacare vote)

director blue ^ | Novembe 29, 2011 | Doug Ross

[opentalk]

In early 2010, then-solicitor general of the United States, Elena Kagan wrote an email to Laurence Tribe cheering for the passage of Obamacare.

...Kagan sent [an email] to Harvard Law Prof. Larry Tribe, who was then working at the Justice Department. This email was sent on March 21, 2010, the day the health-care bill would pass the House. "In an email entitled, 'fingers and toes crossed today!', ... Ms. Kagan happily says to Professor Tribe, 'I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing."

The Judicial Crisis Network describes the case for Kagan's recusal in no uncertain terms.

...For the reasons set forth below, we find it impossible for Justice Kagan to deny that she was directly involved in the defense of PPACA, and that she should therefore recuse herself from any consideration of PPACA’s legality before the Supreme Court.

• Kagan took early and aggressive action to involve her office in Obamacare...

• Kagan made key staffing decisions starting in January of 2010...

• Kagan was part of the deliberative process in the Obamacare defense strategy...

...mandatory recusals for the Justices are governed by federal law. Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 addresses the specific case at hand: the recusal obligations of former government employees. It requires recusal where the judge “has 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 in controversy.” 28 U.S.C. §455(b)(3)...

...Subsection (a) of Title 28 directs that “[a]ny justice, judge or magistrate of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)...

...Justice Kagan is well acquainted with the recusal process. In her first term on the Supreme Court she recused herself from 29 of the 82 cases decided on the merits – over a third of the Court’s oral argument docket – because of her previous work as Solicitor General. She has recused herself from even considering at least 69 cert-stage cases so far this term.

U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services v. State of Florida, et al. promises to be the most important Supreme Court decision in a century, with broad implications for the role of the federal government and the very nature of our constitutionally limited government. In order to secure the integrity of our Courts and of that decision in particular, Justice Kagan should recuse herself from ruling on the case.

[opentalk]

reference links and rest of article at link site

full Title: Justice Kagan's Fingers and Toes Are Crossed, Baby!

[HiTech RedNeck]

would somebody impeach her already?

[Gen.Blather]

Does anybody know how this works? Can she be forcibly recused or does it have to be voluntary? Who would make it happen and how would it happen if she were forcibly recused?

[ExtremeUnction]

Can the chief justice do this?

[opentalk]

Michelle Obama, at a recent Obama fundraiser in Rhode Island:

“We stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country. You’re here because you know that in just 13 months, we’re going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come …

let’s not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices … let’s not forget the impact that their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come.”

link

[HiTech RedNeck]

And what’s this stuff about “fingers and toes crossed” anyhow. It makes Kagan look like a kid in elementary school.

[xkaydet65]

SCOTUS recusals are voluntary. She won’t recuse herself any more than Justice Thomas will recuse himself because of his wife’s work against Obamacare with AHF. While nowhere near as tied to opposition to O’care as Kagan is tied to it, Justice Thomas has received financial benefit as his wife has been nicely compensated for her efforts with AHF. IMO it won’t matter since I expect both Roberts and Scalia to follow Silberman’s affirmation of the mandate and uphold it.

[GeronL]

She doesn’t sound biased at all... lol

NOT

and she looks a lot like a man... Barney Rubble??

[who knows what evil?]

Kevin James.

[who knows what evil?]

Kevin James.

[jessduntno]

“SCOTUS recusals are voluntary. She won’t recuse herself any more than Justice Thomas will recuse himself because of his wife’s work against Obamacare with AHF.”

I had to read that twice. What the hell would these two situations POSSIBLY ave in common?

[opentalk]

Not sure, Holder is blocking other Kagan Obamacare communications from being disclosed, implies it would be more proof of her involvement and activism .

[GeronL]

Oh NNNoooo... she looks exactly like this guy:

Patton Oswalt

[Chode]

i've heard of pearls Before swine, but that is pearls ON swine...

[xkaydet65]

Justice Thomas’s wife has campaiged in her position at AHF against Obamacare. She alos receives a six figure salary for all her work with AHF. Now AHF has no measurable stake in the outcome so this is not a real conflict of interest, but many believe a SOTUS justice should not even approach a case with even a hint of conflict. Kagan’s case is different, but she also has no stake in the outcome. The question is not whether she favored O’care, but whether she in any way prepared the soicitor’s attorneys for arguing the case in court and whether she lied during her testimony when she denied having done so.Absent a smoking gun, and her email to Tribe is not it, she won’t recuse herself. If you go by the standard of appearance of conflict or hint of same, both should probably recuse themselves.

[opentalk]

Kagan worked for the government and appears to have worked on this legislation.

from the article

Justices are governed by federal law. Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 addresses the specific case at hand: the recusal obligations of former government employees. It requires recusal where the judge “has 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 in controversy.” 28 U.S.C. §455(b)(3)...

[LibLieSlayer]

Why would they do that?

LLS

[jessduntno]

“If you go by the standard of appearance of conflict or hint of same, both should probably recuse themselves.”

Yes, those are well repeated MSM talking points. I’ve heard them a million times.

1. Kagan had direct involvement.
2. CT had NO direct involvement.

So, how are they the same?
Or even comparable?
Or even worth consideration?
What is the precedent?

1. They aeren’t
2. None.
3. Ridiculous.
4. No case.

Next?

[xkaydet65]

Question: What was there about the term hint/appearance of conflict of interest that I failed to communicate properly? I swear, I have been posting here since Clinton was POTUS and I have never seen the anger and unwillingness to engage in discussion of differing viewpoints that I’ve seen in these last six months.

[opentalk]

MSM = Obama

from the article regarding the corrupt media.

Here’s how you know your country is over:

-The White House is able to pitch the media the idea that demanding the recusal of a SCOTUS Justice who, prior to her elevation to the Court, advocated for legislation she will be asked to rule on, is a right-wing political ploy — and the media doesn’t instantly break out into hysterical laughter.