“The final arbiter?”
They’re not the final arbiter of anything. See Thomas Jefferson on what he thought on that score. They certainly have nothing to do with that rat bastard’s recusal or unrecusal.
They certainly provide legal cover, right?
Let's see the derps argue against unrecusal if the SCOTUS says its lawful and Constitutional.
Do you live in the real world, goodman?
p.s. I notice you aren't arguing that Sessions sent a letter TODAY to the SCOTUS regarding UNRECUSAL.
Your point seems to be that SCOTUS has no business in the matter.
Do you see?
You're flailing, EG. Its not attractive.
Bagster