Conflicts keep Roberts out of appeals

ap on Yahoo ^ | 11/07/05 | AP

[AntiGuv]

Many comments in this thread as kind of ridiculous. Justice Roberts is recusing himself from precisely those cases that U.S. Title 28, Section 455 says he shall recuse himself from (e.g., when he issued a former ruling on the case or when a lawyer with whom he practiced law served as a lawyer in the case during that time).

[Namyak]

He's no longer impartial... he's already rendered judgment since he already ruled on this particular case. If anyone here believes in the Constitution as it was written, Chief Justice Roberts clearly has to recuse himself.

[AntiGuv]

That should say "many comments in this thread are kind of ridiculous" - actually, scratch the "kind of" (I read some more of them).

[AntiGuv]

You know I've long wondered what would happen if a justice challenged the constitutionality of Article 28, Section 455. Wouldn't all the judges have to recuse themselves?? :)

[msnimje]

Justice Ginsburg needs to recuse herself from any and all cases to which the ACLU is a party

Do you think John Roberts should recuse himself from every case to which a Republican is a party?

[pyx]

If Roberts were honest, he'd order Bader Ginsburg OUT

Order ? Under what provision ?

[pyx]

he'd [Roberts] order Bader Ginsburg OUT

Ruth Bader Ginsberg may well be a piece of communist filth, but she does not report to C.J. Roberts. That's not how the Supreme Court works.

[JLS]

But then it comes back to the full court from another district? Or must Roberts recuse from those cases?

[muawiyah]

Roberts, as Chief Justice, can create such a rule.

One of the weapons he has to enforce such orders is the Administrative Office of the Supreme Court. He can assign parking privileges, rooms, area for staff, heat, air conditioning, water, restroom privileges, etc. These are not the only methods available.