Posted By: The P/Oed Patriot

According to an article in the Washington Times, Justice Kagan is removing herself from ruling on the decision to take a case that will come before the Supreme Court which will address Arizona’s Immigration law:

“The Supreme Court announced Monday it will take the case of Arizona’s tough immigration crackdown law, adding yet another contentious clash between the Obama administration and the states to its docket…..

….In its notice, the court said Justice Elena Kagan had recused herself from the decision to take the case.

Justice Kagan has come under fire for not recusing herself from the decision to hear challenges to the new health care law.”

Hat Tip The Drudge Report

 

 

Disable Refresh for 30 Days

Cookies and JavaScript must be enabled for your setting to be saved.

1 2

`
  1. how about she remove her marxist A$$ from the supreme court forever

  2. I can’t be the first to notice that recusing herself from the decision to take the case is not the same as recusing herself from making a ruling on the case itself. Is she off the case or just off the panel that decides whether to take the case?

  3. Good for him!

  4. If she recuses herself from this case, she SURELY should recuse herself from ObamaCare case for the EXACT same reasons! What could possibly be the difference in her reasons?

  5. The Supreme Court issued a document saying it would take the case, and in the same document, also announced that Kagan would recuse herself. Justice Kagan’s recusal is timely, and of course proper because she was involved in this matter, before she was placed on the Court.

  6. Dave in Dallas—- That is an excellent question. The left loves to play silly little games like this. Recuse her self from the panel to accept the case, and then rule on it in banc.

  7. Wait till the house and senate are dominated w

    New conservatives. The power to remove jutices and

    Impeach presidents. The left will be totally F ing

    Foaming at the mouth. Watch

  8. ONE DOWN!

  9. Courts make judgements on “precedent”, so we have one for her recuse on the Arizona case, she must recuse for Obamacare. That would seem just and logical.

  10. Wise Latina at your service

  11. Typical sleazy ambulance chasing lawyer splitting hairs regarding recusal. She’s only removing herself from deciding if the SCOTUS will hear the case, not from sitting in judgement if they do decide to hear the case.

    I seriously doubt if the SCOTUS does decide to hear the case that she will have the moral fiber to recuse herself, just as she will not recuse herself regarding ObamaCare.

  12. Bless his heart!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  13. ONLY ONE WAY SHE IS – she MUST believe there is a SERIOUS threat she could be removed from the Bench entirely if she does NOT recuse herself from a case like this or Obamacare that she has some “finger in the pie”, previously. And would help pull Odrama Queen down as well.

  14. #1 December 12, 2011 at 11:34 am
    #1AMERICAN

    SO AGREED! SO TOTALLY AGREED!

  15. She needs to recuse herself from Obama’s CommieCare as well.

  16. Unethical acts, and acts that bring the process into question as being corrupted by prejudice and self-interest, are indeed grounds for impeachment. And there are solid reasons why Liberals also think that Justice Kagan should recuse herself from hearing the Obamacare cases.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/12/obamacare_and_the_supreme_court_should_elena_kagan_recuse_herself_.html

  17. This is just cover for her refusal to recuse from the IMPROTANT case, the case that will socialize America until it falls. I can hear it now: “you right wing extremeists just don’t want this poor woman to be able to rule on ANYTHING!!!!!!!!!” Cover, cover, cover.

  18. #21 December 12, 2011 at 1:21 pm
    Eubulides commented:

    You missed the point, again. That article you didn’t read was published by Slate, by Eric Segall, a professor of constitutional law at Georgia State University College of Law and a former trial attorney for the Justice Department. In that article, he points out that recusal rules for Federal judges are statutory, that is, actual laws, which means that violations of these rules qualify as “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

    “First the law: A federal statute requires that any “justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Federal law also requires that a judge recuse herself if the judge previously served in governmental employment “and in that capacity participated as a … counsel, adviser, or material witness concerning the proceeding or has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.” ”

    He then proceeds to point to specific facts and evidence of actions by Judge Kagan that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that, if Judge Kagan failed to recuse herself from consideration of the Obamacare cases, she would be in violation of Federal law.

    These recusal rules exist for a reason: past incidents where our judicial process has been tainted by prejudice and self-interest incident caused great damage to the public perception of the court.

    So, here’s the link, again.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/12/obamacare_and_the_supreme_court_should_elena_kagan_recuse_herself_.html

  19. Is she returning to her job as Mall Cop Paul Blart?



1 2


`

© Copyright 2014, TheGatewayPundit.com. All rights reserved. B
Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions