[jessduntno]

“What was there about the term hint/appearance of conflict of interest that I failed to communicate properly?”

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

Failing to see there not being any possible way these two cases as similar might have something to do with it.

[xkaydet65]

Okay let's try another route. Justice Thomas's wife worked zealously in AHF's efforts to stop passage of Obamacare.Justice Kagan cheered the passage of Obamacare and may have participated in planning to defend it against legal challenge. She did not take part in the writing or passage of this monstrosity.

When that Wisconsin judge stopped implementation of the governor's labor reforms many pointed to her husband's or son's, I don't recall which, ties to the Wisconsin labor movement, and were angered that she didn't recuse herself. Those demands were absolutely correct, even though the judge had no direct interest in the case before her..

if there is evidence that Justice Kagan was not honest before the Senate about her involvement in preparing Obamacare's legal defense, then I believe she should be impeached, but absent compelling evidence I see recusal of neither or both as the proper course. Certainly this makes me a commie pinko who should be zotted and banned immediately.