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

Skip to comments.

Kagan Sits in Judgment of ObamacareóDespite Cheering Its Passage and Assigning Lawyer to Defend It
CNSNews ^ | March 26, 2012 | Terence P. Jeffrey

Posted on 03/28/2012 4:06:09 PM PDT by yoe

When the Supreme Court on Monday began hearing oral arguments in the cases challenging the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—AKA “Obamacare”—Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan showed up to hear the arguments and gave no indication she would recuse herself from judging the cases even though she had cheered enactment of Obamacare as an Obama political appointee and had personally assigned her top deputy in the Obama Justice Department to defend the law in federal court.

A federal law, 28 USC 455, says a Supreme Court justice must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or anytime he has “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he “served in governmental employment.”

During her confirmation process in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kagan assured the committee in written responses to (its questionnaire) that she would follow the “letter and spirit” of 28 U.S.C. 455.

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


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: 2012; 28usc455; absenceofhonor; corruption; democratcorruption; democrats; dncrico; elenakagan; fraud; govtabuse; harvardresumefraud; impeach; impropriety; judicialcorruption; kagan; liberalfascism; liberalism; liberals; nocodeofethics; noethics; obama; obamacare; progressives; scotus; supremedishonor; supremeimpropriety; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-55 next last
Is the 'smart Latina woman' mendacious also?
1 posted on 03/28/2012 4:06:14 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yoe

Awwww it’s all on the (dis)honor system.

Unless Congress had the moxie to impeach and convict her.


2 posted on 03/28/2012 4:08:50 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Hard liberals such as Kagan have no shame. They operate with the motto “end justifies the means”.


3 posted on 03/28/2012 4:13:03 PM PDT by entropy12 (Every tax payer now owes $150,000 towards the national debt. We are worse than broke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

“A federal law, 28 USC 455, says...”

Might as well stop reading. Laws don’t apply to democrats.


4 posted on 03/28/2012 4:13:30 PM PDT by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Does mendacious mean lesbian?


5 posted on 03/28/2012 4:19:31 PM PDT by Henry Hnyellar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

Kagan should have recused herself.


6 posted on 03/28/2012 4:21:53 PM PDT by mylife (The Roar Of The Masses Could Be Farts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yoe

,,,,, CORRUPTION in the high court ,,,, what’s new here ???


7 posted on 03/28/2012 4:22:06 PM PDT by Lionheartusa1 (-: Socialism is the equal distribution of misery :-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Henry Hnyellar

Mendacious means to tell lies.


8 posted on 03/28/2012 4:25:10 PM PDT by madison10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
This is a huge black mark for Kagan. It's obvious that she should recuse herself but she refuses to do so in what may be a futile effort prevent Obamacare from being declared unconstitutional.

She is a rookie Justice who has chosen a scorched earth approach that exposed her lack of Judicial ethics and has cost her the respect and trust of her peers on the court, even those on the left. No one likes a hack for a Judge and Kagan has shown herself to a hack.

Soon the judgment on ObamaCAre will be rendered but the black mark she has made for herself will live on for the rest of her tenure on the court. This black mark will limit her effectiveness as a Justice. She will pay a high price going forward for her support of ObamaCare

If there is big change in Congress and a Republican President is elected there is a good chance that more evidence of her direct involvement in ObamaCare will surface and her ethical violations will be exposed to the public.

Her reputation as an ethical Justice will be destroyed and she may be forced to resign or be impeached by a Congress that is under pressure from the public

9 posted on 03/28/2012 4:25:49 PM PDT by rdcbn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck
I think that it is very possible that if looks like there are enough Justices voting to uphold Vinson's determination that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, rather than cast a futile vote that would lead to her impeachment, Kagan will vote with the majority to try to salvage her position.
10 posted on 03/28/2012 4:31:51 PM PDT by rdcbn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rdcbn

Obama and other left wingers surely don’t care about anything more than a reliable vote for their causes (although something even these pawns do something surprising like taking part in the unanimous tell-off to the EPA the other week, but that could just be the repayment of a favor to Roberts).


11 posted on 03/28/2012 4:33:14 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: yoe

She can posture all she wants...she will support Obamacare forever.


12 posted on 03/28/2012 4:34:08 PM PDT by Pharmboy (She turned me into a Newt...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rdcbn

Either way she comes out looking like a dummox... not that it’s going to matter so much to HER, but it will reflect on Obama.


13 posted on 03/28/2012 4:34:56 PM PDT by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

Why can’t Chief Justice Roberts direct Kagan to recuse herself?


14 posted on 03/28/2012 4:38:45 PM PDT by Ken522
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: yoe

You can bet Kagan is an embedded SPY FOR THE REGIME. Watch your backs, Justices! They probably should sweep for listening devices and other spy equipment which Kagan may be using on them. I wouldn’t so much as SHOW HER my notes let alone hand them to her.


15 posted on 03/28/2012 4:44:35 PM PDT by FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HiTech RedNeck

That reminds me.. Is Boehner bound, gagged and locked up in a Democrat’s closet somewhere? /crickets.. That dude has about as much fight in him as a marshmallow.


16 posted on 03/28/2012 4:47:31 PM PDT by FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs

Really sucks to have the criminals in charge!


17 posted on 03/28/2012 4:49:05 PM PDT by bicyclerepair ( REPLACE D-W-S ! http://www.karenforcongress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: yoe

the statute:

(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;
(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;
(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;

The purpose of the statute mandating recusal is to assure the rest of us of the impartiality of the justices.
I suppose this justice believes the question turns on the meaning of the word “shall.”
A scofflaw US Supreme Court Justice, mmm mmmm mmm.


18 posted on 03/28/2012 5:00:43 PM PDT by tumblindice (our new, happy lives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bicyclerepair

As aware and wise as we are, I think even WE are surprised as to just how deeply those seeking to overthrow our Republic have infiltrated our government. The progressives have been working on this.. p r o g r e s s i v e l y. Of course it doesn’t help that they have total control of the public school system and are churning out more dumbed-down students-turned-socialists as we speak.


19 posted on 03/28/2012 5:08:40 PM PDT by FedsRStealingOurCountryFromUs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mylife

“...Kagan should have recused herself....”

An honorable person would have.


20 posted on 03/28/2012 5:11:45 PM PDT by NCC-1701 (In Memphis on January 20, 2009, pump price were $1.49. We all know what happened after that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-55 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