Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kagan refuses to recuse on Obamacare
NetRightDaily ^ | 14 Nov 2011 | NetRight Daily

Posted on 11/24/2011 10:17:47 AM PST by plsjr

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear the so-called “26-state lawsuit” against the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. This announcement ends speculation whether recent Obama appointee Justice Elena Kagan will recuse herself from the case.

It is clear that Justice Kagan has refused requests that she not participate in this ruling. The failure of the Court order to note that Kagan had recused herself indicates that she has not. Traditionally, when a justice decides not to participate in a decision to hear a case, the Court order notes that fact. No notification means that it can be assumed that each justice participated in the decision, including Kagan.

The calls for Justice Kagan to recuse herself are based upon her role as Obama’s Solicitor General when Obamacare was passed. In this position, she must have been involved in the strategy decisions on how to defend Obamacare. In fact, and by her own admission, she “was present at ‘at least one’ meeting in which the challenges to PPACA were discussed.”

This admission on its face should have disqualified Kagan from participating in the Court case, as she and those who reported to her, were heavily involved in framing the arguments supporting the law.

ALG’s, Bill Wilson argues that, “Kagan is no more of an independent jurist on this issue than Obama himself would be. For her to refuse to recuse herself from the Supreme Court’s consideration of the constitutionality of the law is an affront to the American system of jurisprudence.”

Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2011/11/kagan-refuses-to-recuse-on-obamacare/#ixzz1eeCJfXjW

(Excerpt) Read more at netrightdaily.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: kagan; obamacare; recuse; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last
I know there are a multitude of issues, but this is one that should be at the top of our lists. The crass disregard for any semblance of the law is the hallmark of this administration and both parties. We really need to clean house if we want America to survive.
1 posted on 11/24/2011 10:17:51 AM PST by plsjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: plsjr
Well, I'm shocked.
2 posted on 11/24/2011 10:19:11 AM PST by null and void (This is day 1038 of America's vacation from reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

3 posted on 11/24/2011 10:19:48 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Roll the stone away, Let the guilty pay, It's Independence Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

4 posted on 11/24/2011 10:22:24 AM PST by Baynative (The penalty for not participating in politics is you will be governed by your inferiors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Even the flippy floppy RINO Mitt Romney has yet to waffle on his promise to enact a 50 state waiver upon inauguration if he is inaugurated, this Rat manipulative power play is hated so. Let Kagan be intransigent, it will only increase the wrath to come upon the Rat machine.


5 posted on 11/24/2011 10:22:56 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (bloodwashed not whitewashed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

How can an extreme leftist like Kagan even be considered when she doesn’t even believe in the constitution?


6 posted on 11/24/2011 10:23:47 AM PST by bigdirty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Someone recently posted the text of a law that says that a jurist MUST recuse themselves from any case where they may have a conflict of interest.

So, now a jurist in the highest court in the land can just break the LAW with impunity? Excuse me, but the irony in that is almost too stark to describe.

If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.


7 posted on 11/24/2011 10:26:02 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Anything new from the communists empire of the Democrats?


8 posted on 11/24/2011 10:26:47 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

LOL. . . It is shocking, is it not?


9 posted on 11/24/2011 10:28:21 AM PST by ArchAngel1983 (Arch Angel- on guard / The democrat party "Can Go Straight To Hell".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

There are no laws in this country. There are simply powerful people trying to get away with things, and usually succeeding.


10 posted on 11/24/2011 10:29:18 AM PST by ClearCase_guy (Roll the stone away, Let the guilty pay, It's Independence Day)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

This is just one of the many affronts to our democracy that has surfaced during the Obumo regime. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if Kagan made money via insider trading over Obumocare. But this administration is all about in-your-face activism and blatant cronyism whether by appointment or union kickbacks or targeted payoffs aka Solyndra.
Retch if you must but get to the polls even if you have to be wheeled.


11 posted on 11/24/2011 10:30:41 AM PST by bossmechanic (If all else fails, hit it with a hammer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Obamacare is one of the central reasons Kagan was appointed and confirmed. She is “trustworthy”.


12 posted on 11/24/2011 10:32:14 AM PST by JimSEA (The future ain't what it used to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdirty

Exactly what I was thinking. It ticks me off time and time again when our Judges and Politicians all take an OATH to protect and defend the constitution, to abide by it, and then right off the bat they break that oath. I mean WTF? Lying on the stand in court can get you a perjury charge, but breaking an oath gets a shrug of the shoulders? This Obamacare is so freakin unconstitutional it blows my mind. Can you imagine the level of corruption this would entail? FORCING the people to buy a companys product? Oh yeah, no politician is going to take financial advantage of that. sheesh!!!!


13 posted on 11/24/2011 10:35:55 AM PST by GrandJediMasterYoda (Nancy Pelosi - The #1 reason why we need a Constitutional amendment for Congressional drug testing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Congrats needs to act to permanently remove her.


14 posted on 11/24/2011 10:35:59 AM PST by Caipirabob ( Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Congress needs to act to permanently remove her.


15 posted on 11/24/2011 10:36:11 AM PST by Caipirabob ( Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bigdirty
Like Sotomayor, Kagan is an activist, not a jurist. Obama put her there to influence policy when possible. Not to bring an intelligent interpretation to the constitution.

This is another example of the mistake America made in electing a community organizer to do the job of respecting and representing all of our citizens.

Shame on the voters for what they have done and shame on the republicans in the Senate for supporting Kagan and Sotomayor.

16 posted on 11/24/2011 10:38:56 AM PST by Baynative (The penalty for not participating in politics is you will be governed by your inferiors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

Which is exactly what Obama wants. Kagan gets her marching orders from him no doubt at all.

17 posted on 11/24/2011 10:39:14 AM PST by Bloody Sam Roberts (Attacking Wall Street because you're jobless is like burning down Whole Foods because you're hungry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

She will not recuse herself, since she has privately agreed to vote precisely the way she is instructed to vote by Obama and the Democrats on every case that comes before her so long as she sits on that bench. Sotomayor has made a similar pledge, I’m sure.


18 posted on 11/24/2011 10:42:42 AM PST by Wiser now (Socialism does not eliminate poverty, it guarantees it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
Notice that the only objections come from Republicans.

There is no reason for Democrats to be upset. It would literally make no sense to a Democrat for Kagan to recuse herself.

To Democrats, the purpose of Presidential appointment and Senate confirmation of a judge with life tenure is to overthrow our government of limited powers. That is exactly why Elena Kagan was nominated, and that is exactly why she was confirmed.

For her to recuse herself, to defect from the battle for communism on the cusp of its greatest triumph in all of history, would make as much sense as her dressing for court in purple underwear and announcing her opinions in Norwegian.

We cannot begin to win until we understand the terms of the battle.

19 posted on 11/24/2011 10:42:44 AM PST by Jim Noble (To live peacefully with credit-based consumption and fiat money, men would have to be angels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
There are no laws in this country. There are simply powerful people trying to get away with things, and usually succeeding.

Ask Qadaffi how well that works out in the long run.

20 posted on 11/24/2011 10:44:42 AM PST by null and void (This is day 1038 of America's vacation from reality.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Kagan also refuses to recuse on Hillary’s _____y.


21 posted on 11/24/2011 10:45:57 AM PST by LyinLibs (All moslems are somewhere on the killing-you spectrum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative

Great cartoon.

Don’t you think the other BO appointee would be at least cracking a smile?


22 posted on 11/24/2011 10:46:17 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
ObamaCare is the ruling class sinecure...perpetual bureaucratic splendor and bliss form behind a computer screen in DC.

The only way that sucker is going away..is when We the People go rip it out by the roots...

23 posted on 11/24/2011 10:47:08 AM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob

Congress needs to act to permanently remove her.


LOL

We could only hope.


24 posted on 11/24/2011 10:47:27 AM PST by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; plsjr
If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

I believe that is one of their goals!

25 posted on 11/24/2011 10:47:27 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Baynative; bigdirty
[BO] put her there to influence policy when possible. Not to bring an intelligent interpretation to the constitution.

Just think of the same thing taking place these days in many American law schools. :( I think one of BO's (and those who control him) goals is to create a generation of "lawyers in name only" who do not understand our Constitution.

26 posted on 11/24/2011 10:50:29 AM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

Justices are to serve in good behaviour.

How is pretending to be an impartial judge over an issue that she is on record vociferously supporting considered good behaviour?

Impeach her!


27 posted on 11/24/2011 10:51:00 AM PST by Pilgrim's Progress (http://www.baptistbiblebelievers.com/BYTOPICS/tabid/335/Default.aspx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob

My memory is not that good on the subject, but I think I recall that the repubs in the senate had a plan to block her but at the last minute lost their nerve and did not.

Would someone who knows please confirm or correct.

If my memory is correct, the rinos have done us in. This is just the beginning.


28 posted on 11/24/2011 10:52:08 AM PST by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

And a lot of times the laws that are enforced are unconstitutional.


29 posted on 11/24/2011 10:53:00 AM PST by goldi (')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

I can’t believe CJ Roberts doesn’t have the authority to stop her. He is Chief Justice!!!


30 posted on 11/24/2011 10:53:49 AM PST by shield (Rev 2:9 Woe unto those who say they are Judahites and are not, but are of the syna GOG ue of Satan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #31 Removed by Moderator

To: Windflier

“Someone recently posted the text of a law that says that a jurist MUST recuse themselves from any case where they may have a conflict of interest.

So, now a jurist in the highest court in the land can just break the LAW with impunity? Excuse me, but the irony in that is almost too stark to describe.

If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.”


IMPEACH!


32 posted on 11/24/2011 10:57:14 AM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
Great. . Happy Thanksgiving America. . . I just . . .
33 posted on 11/24/2011 11:04:28 AM PST by Art in Idaho (Conservatism is the only hope for Western Civilization.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

What we are witnessing is Khrushchev finally making good on his promise - to bury us!


34 posted on 11/24/2011 11:08:07 AM PST by wendell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
We really need to clean house if we want America to survive.

The problems in DC will never be solved at the ballot box.

It's called hitting the reset button.

The military steps in and fires all three branches of government.

Six months later new elections, all amendments repealed except for the bill of rights.

The capital moves every other year, no more DC calling the shots.

Only taxpayers and veterans can vote.

Quotas on lawyers, who are not allowed to hold elective office.

35 posted on 11/24/2011 11:09:00 AM PST by Rome2000 (OBAMA IS A COMMUNIST CRYPTO-MUSLIM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon
but I think I recall that the repubs in the senate had a plan to block her but at the last minute lost their nerve and did not.

One thing I do know is, that my hopefully-soon-to-be-retired Senior Senator threw his support to her. Right after Goober Graham threw her his panties.

"I have concluded that Solicitor General Elena Kagan is clearly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and that she has demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of court history and decisions,” Mr. Lugar said in a statement posted to his Web site Wednesday. “I believe that she has had a distinguished career in both education and public service and is well regarded by the legal community and her peers.”

36 posted on 11/24/2011 11:10:25 AM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court

Only if Congress lets butch Kagan get away with it.

I will be calling the office of that douchebag Rubio to see what he's going to do about it.

37 posted on 11/24/2011 11:11:45 AM PST by Rome2000 (OBAMA IS A COMMUNIST CRYPTO-MUSLIM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
"There are no laws in this country. There are simply powerful people trying to get away with things, and usually succeeding.

If I'm not mistaken, the supreme court must abide by the same rules that apply to lower courts. Any matter which comes before the court that a judge has an interest in, must recuse themselves. If they do not, they are subject to impeachment, which is the only way an appointed judge can be removed.

It would seem to me that the House of Representatives should start warming up for passing articles of impeachment, timed so that the balance of the senate tips toward the R side.

If and likely WHEN that happens, there will be enough clout in both houses to not only impeach but to convict the B. I. itch, else the D's remaining in congress will have to beg for TP their segregated rest rooms, and they will be allotted one sheet per dump....

38 posted on 11/24/2011 11:12:04 AM PST by fantail 1952 (Common sense foreign policy: Help your friends. Whip your enemies. Sort out the rest.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. Oaths in this country are as yet universally considered as sacred obligations. That which you have taken, and so solemnly repeated on that venerable ground, is an ample pledge of your sincerity and devotion to your country and its government.

John Adams, 1798

-PJ
39 posted on 11/24/2011 11:12:45 AM PST by Political Junkie Too (If you can vote for President, then your children can run for President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr

She needs to be removed.

Fat a$$ed ugly, fished-face commie cow.


40 posted on 11/24/2011 11:18:13 AM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Prepare for survival. (Karl Denninger has jumped the shark. Do not visit his blog.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
So, the House needs to bring Articles of Impeachment against her for refusing to recuse herself when doing so is clearly called for. We'll see how far that goes, and even if they do manage to bring Articles of Impeachment, we'll see whether the Court would ignore it and hear the case before the impeachment proceedings are complete.

All the folks who sat out the 2008 election because McCain sucked so bad (and he did) can take comfort in knowing that he might have appointed a bad Justice as well. The odds of him appointing two bad ones, though, is very small since he'd have thrown a sop to conservatives on one of them. So, enjoy the fruits that flow from having a democracy rather than a republic. The American people have worked very hard to bring things down to this level and it seems a bit unusual for them to now complain about going down the toilet. It's really sad those who fought this fascist system every step of the way have to suffer along with the dolts, but hey, that's what you get with government schools and that's exactly what was predicted in the late 1800s during the battle over public schools.

41 posted on 11/24/2011 11:19:15 AM PST by Rashputin (Obama stark, raving, mad, and even his security people know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tacticalogic
Is it still too soon to shoot the bastards?

It is increasingly obvious we are rapidly moving beyond that "awkward" stage...

42 posted on 11/24/2011 11:19:26 AM PST by Gritty (Compromise that is not a solution is a waste of time. We either save this country or we do not-Rubio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

It’s not irony.

It is the double-standard of the ruling elite and everyone else.


43 posted on 11/24/2011 11:19:34 AM PST by Ghost of Philip Marlowe (Prepare for survival. (Karl Denninger has jumped the shark. Do not visit his blog.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; All
See Title 28 of the United States Code, Section 455:

28 U.S.C. § 455 : US Code - Section 455: Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;
(3) Where he 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;

Note that (b)(1) and (b)(3) use "he" when referring to the judge. Perhaps Kagan gets off on a technicality.

44 posted on 11/24/2011 11:21:56 AM PST by ProtectOurFreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

Absolutely.

You have a great tagline, btw. :)

45 posted on 11/24/2011 11:24:32 AM PST by proud American in Canada (Go, Herman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
"If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court."

If the Chief Justice cared about the Constitution he'd tell her to recuse herself or tell the House to draw up Articles of Impeachment against her and refuse to seat her until the process was complete. He could then hear the case without her and be done with it, or delay the case until after she was impeached. I say, "after she was impeached" because there's never been a more clear cut case of meeting the criteria the law demands a judge recuse them-self over.

Of course, whether the Chief Justice cares about the Constitution or not is one of the things pretty much up in the air these days given that he ignores a foreign national serving as president or, at the very least, ignores that he was illegally placed on the ballot in a great many states

JMHO

46 posted on 11/24/2011 11:24:58 AM PST by Rashputin (Obama stark, raving, mad, and even his security people know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
Someone recently posted the text of a law that says that a jurist MUST recuse themselves from any case where they may have a conflict of interest...

If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

sounds like a great case for IMPEACHMENT...


47 posted on 11/24/2011 11:24:58 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (I can take tomorrow, spend it all today. Who can take your income, tax it all away. Obama Man can. :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier
If Kagan doesn’t recuse herself from the Obamacare case, it will effectively nullify the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

Exactly! Coward-Piven in action. Sodamayor, same thing.

48 posted on 11/24/2011 11:36:10 AM PST by upchuck (Rerun: Think you know hardship? Wait till the dollar is no longer the world's reserve currency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; Rashputin
Someone recently posted the text of a law that says that a jurist MUST recuse themselves from any case where they may have a conflict of interest...

Here it is:....
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2794942/posts


49 posted on 11/24/2011 11:36:41 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (I can take tomorrow, spend it all today. Who can take your income, tax it all away. Obama Man can. :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: plsjr
Well I'm glad to see Claude Raines showed up, but seems someone forgot to invite Private Pyle, in forty-nine posts.



"Surprise, surprise, surprise!"
And Goober Graham halped!
50 posted on 11/24/2011 11:45:29 AM PST by fallujah-nuker (Pat Buchanan, kryptonite to RINO's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-96 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson