Skip to comments.85 Call for Kagan Recusal on Obamacare
Posted on 11/19/2011 4:20:53 AM PST by Kaslin
The call for Congress to hold hearings on the need for Justice Elena Kagan to recuse herself from the ObamaCare case now on the docket of the Supreme Court has exploded. The number of organizations signing on to a letter to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith has more than tripled in just 48 hours since our original blog post calling for her to stand aside. Following is a link to the final draft of the letter signed by the leaders of 85 citizens organizations and related other articles and documents.
Leader's to House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith
Judicial Action Group's
Judicial Crisis Network brief: Elena Kagan, The Justice Who Knew Too Much
Leaders of two dozen citizen organizations are urging the House Judiciary Committee to hold hearings on the need for Elena Kagan to recuse herself from the ObamaCare case now scheduled to be heard by the Supreme Court. In a letter to Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (), and copied to House Republican Leadership, the group concludes that "a reasonable person would certainly have sufficient basis to question the impartiality of Justice Kagan if she were permitted to prepare the defense of a case as an advocate and then switch roles and judge the defense of the same case as a justice." (Emphasis included)
The effort is spearheaded by Phillip Jauregui, President of Judicial Action Group, a Washington based organization dedicated to "judicial renewal" by returning "the judiciary to its proper role of deciding cases and not legislating from the bench."
The letter from the distinguished group of leaders outlines five essential grievances and questions that they feel should be explored regarding the need for Kagan to recuse herself from the ObamaCare case, as follows:
The final grievance above is in reference to the DOJ's continued refusal to provide documents as originally requested by Chairman Smith last July such that the Judiciary Committee might "properly understand any involvement by Justice Kagan in matters relating to health care legislation or litigation while she was Solicitor General." More than just a stiff-arm refusal, the DOJ called the Judiciary Committee's reasonable request "unseemly."
Elena Kagan's fingerprints and DNA are all over the White House's efforts to muscle through passage of ObamaCare and anticipate the legal defense of the legislation. The Leader's Group raises the obvious question of how can the same person be both advocate and impartial jurist on the same issue. Imagine for a moment if the shoe was on the other foot if we were talking about a conservative judge and a conservative issue? Say Henry Hyde, the great pro-life champion and author of the Hyde Amendment, was a member of the SCOTUS and a pro-life question was before the Court? The liberal media and the left would be incensed, animated, and outraged at even a slight consideration that Hyde might not recuse himself. Yet, all we hear about the obvious need for Kagan to recuse herself from the ObamaCare case is silence, and charges that to even raise the question is "unseemly."
There’s no way in hell she’ll recuse herself.
Correct. She’ll never recuse herself. Her ilk don’t have a care for justice or the will of the people. She’s a communist through and through.
And not only that, the Marxist media in this country won’t say a freaking word about it.
Don't let this blatant "dirty pool" procedure go unnoticed!
She wont recuse herself and there is nothing you can do about it,SO THERE! Blah Blah Blah,Im rubber your glue whatever you say to me will bounce off and stick to you.
Sticks and stones will break your bones nad names will never hurt you.
I know you are but what am I?
If she wont recuse herself, then she needs impeached and removed from the bench.
Here’s the problem: Only Republicans are calling for her recusal.
The Republicans in Congress DO NOT YET RECOGNIZE that the Democrats are not playing the same game by the same rules that they are.
The Democrats don’t want Kagan to recuse herself, BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE IT WOULD BE WRONG.
It would be wrong because the Democrats believe the purpose of Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation of Federal judges is to overthrow the system. THey got Kagan on for exactly this reason.
For Democrats, would make no more sense for her to recuse herself than it would make sense for her to dress in purple underwear and deliver her opinions in Norwegian.
You nailed it.
You know, I’ve often wondered: since we see many cities establishing themselves as “sanctuary cities” in regards to breaking what they see as an unjust law, can states declare themselves “sanctuary states” in regards to this law?
I called my congressman’s office yesterday and demanded him to start the wheels rolling on impeachment if she doesn’t do the right thing. Personally I think she should be impeached anyway based solely on the fact that she is so freeking ugly.....as are the other two! Don’t they make good looking rat judges?
Impeaching Kagan would be a worthwhile goal for the Congress once we sweep the libs from power in 2012.
The=is stupid woman needs to be made an example.
This is all just pissing into the wind. We won’t even get the satisfaction of news coverage.
The Current FReepathon Pays For The Current Quarters Expenses?
they should do that simply based on the fraud she committed while working for Clinton.
She changed sworn testimony during the partial birth abortion debate.
She changed it so it was interpreted as meaning the opposite of it’s intended message, and the statement influenced the Court’s decision.
She is a criminal
It doesn’t matter if all 535 members of Congress “call for [a] Kagan recusal”.
Being a doctrinaire leftist with her “eyes on the prize”, she is NOT going to recuse herself from this case. And there will be no way to force her to do so, because recusal, by its own standard, is a “removal of one’s self” — that is to say, it must be she who makes the decision to step back herself. And of course, we know what her decision will be.
Having written that, perhaps her “refusal of recusal” may become so glaring a violation of ethics in pursuit of a political goal that it might sway _other justices_ on the Court towards our side. I’m thinking in particular of Anthony Kennedy, who too often “swings with the prevailing winds” of “moderation”.
If Justice Kennedy is put-off by her behavior enough, perhaps (just perhaps) that may provide the impetus for him to “swing towards our side” on this one....
Can Roberts force her to recuse herself?
The pirate Roberts was put there to protect these leftist appointments. He wil however educate us on why he cannot do anything regarding a fellow ‘justice’ and only the legislative can change the situation.