Kagan refuses to recuse on Obamacare

NetRightDaily ^ | 14 Nov 2011 | NetRight Daily

[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

[Rashputin]

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.

[Gritty]

Is it still too soon to shoot the bastards?

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

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

It’s not irony.

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

[ProtectOurFreedom]

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.

[proud American in Canada]

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. :)

[Rashputin]

"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

[skinkinthegrass]

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...

[upchuck]

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.

[skinkinthegrass]

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

[fallujah-nuker]

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!

[ExTexasRedhead]

Behold what is, in my opinion, the next Holocaust designed to give Liberal politicians power over your life and death based on their criteria. The enemies within want to legally eliminate whomever they want. Sound like Nazi Germany yet?

The following information was called into talk show host Mark Levin by a neurosurgeon. The neurosurgeon had just returned from a conference by HHS (Health and Human Services) for physicians regarding the new health care law that will go into effect in 2014. The neurosurgeon said that the physicians in attendance were instructed that if a “unit over age 70” comes in needing brain surgery, only comfort care is to be given. Patients, according to the new health care law, will be referred to as “units”.

Following the neurosurgeon’s call, a nurse from Waco, TX called in informing that those 65 and older would need to attend mandatory end of life counseling every two years and that those 65 or older would only receive “comfort care”. Illegal aliens would be exempt.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mKRsBSTgprU

This ghoulish reality must be used against every Elitist, power-hungry politician running for re-election in November 2012.. IMO, this truth of their duplicity must go viral until every voter realizes that their lives are at stake. Bend over and kiss your rears goodbye if this isn’t stopped.

[Mr. Wright]

No one can never accuse the NOBAMA administration of playing by the rules.

[Windflier]

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

I'm sure there's a statute somewhere that defines the word "he" as a general appellation to describe a person, regardless of gender.

Thanks for posting the US code (Title 28). I don't see how the Supreme Court gets around this. Kagan clearly has a conflict of interest in this case, and per the law, MUST recuse herself, or face impeachment.

This must not be allowed to stand, or our entire system of jurisprudence will be thrown out the window.

[Secret Agent Man]

Roberts should ask her to recuse herself and keep her dignity intact. If not, Roberts should tell her she’s been recused.

[Chode]

and America takes another one in the........

[Popman]

——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——

Though I agree wholeheartedly.....the only problem is the dems in the House would want Thomas to recuse himself as well under the guise that his wife worked against Obamacare

I know it’s apples and oranges but that old Marxist saying “the ends justify the means” would certainly come into play to keep Kagan on the bench to hear the case

...and the House certainly has no one with the guts to call the deems out and challenge them on their cravenness

[Windflier]

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

I haven't written to my Congress critters in some time, but they've got to hear from me about this. It's time for The People to melt the DC phone lines ... again.

[Windflier]

You have a great tagline, btw.

Thanks. Even Rush has stolen it a time or two. I was quite honored.

[Windflier]

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.

We'll see what John Roberts is made of in the next few days. If he doesn't act, then he's a fraud, and we'll have to inundate Congress with appeals to begin impeachment proceedings against Kagan.

[Windflier]

Thanks for the link to yesterday’s discussion about this topic.