So, will Elana Kagan recuse herself from USSC Obamacare case?

[Little-Acorn]

Elana Kagan was Solicitor General for the Obama administration while Obamacare was being crafted, and likely had an active hand in making sure it was "legal", by whatever odd definition the Obamanites wanted to use. Mnay people say that, now that she is a Supreme Court justice, she should recuse herself from consideration and judging on a bill that she helped put together.

Suppose the four Constitutional justices (Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia) vote against Obamacare, and the remaining big-govt justices (Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor) vote for it, and Kennedy weathervanes to the left and also votes for it. Then if Kagan were to recuse herelf, the outcome would be a 4-4 tie on the Supreme Court.

And this would make it very significant WHICH case was being examined... because a tie would cause the decision of the previous court (11th circuit in this 26-state case) to be upheld. And that previous court has struck down the Mandate, as unconstitutional.

So Obamacare would quickly die.

So, Kagan could be regarded as the "tiebreaking" vote, by her decision to recuse herself or not. (If she does not recuse, then she would surely vote for Obamacare; if she does recuse, then the 11th circuit's strikedown would become "law" if the other justices vote as described).

Will she or won't she?

 

[Pandora]

Elana Kagan was Solicitor General for the Obama administration while Obamacare was being crafted, and likely had an active hand in making sure it was "legal", by whatever odd definition the Obamanites wanted to use. Mnay people say that, now that she is a Supreme Court justice, she should recuse herself from consideration and judging on a bill that she helped put together.

Suppose the four Constitutional justices (Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia) vote against Obamacare, and the remaining big-govt justices (Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor) vote for it, and Kennedy weathervanes to the left and also votes for it. Then if Kagan were to recuse herelf, the outcome would be a 4-4 tie on the Supreme Court.

And this would make it very significant WHICH case was being examined... because a tie would cause the decision of the previous court (11th circuit in this 26-state case) to be upheld. And that previous court has struck down the Mandate, as unconstitutional.

So Obamacare would quickly die.

So, Kagan could be regarded as the "tiebreaking" vote, by her decision to recuse herself or not. (If she does not recuse, then she would surely vote for Obamacare; if she does recuse, then the 11th circuit's strikedown would become "law" if the other justices vote as described).

Will she or won't she?

I bet no she wont but and I bet the same people who are ok with that will demand that Thomas recuse himself because his wife likes the tea party

 

[dogtowner]

no freaking way. Roberts will have to do that if its even possible for him to force.

 

[BigRob]

This is in no way going to be an easy victory.

 

[dogtowner]

This is in no way going to be an easy victory.

it should be 9-0 b ut you are correct. not easy.

 

[pocketfullofshells]

you mean Clarance Thomas right?

 

[Pandora]

you mean Clarance Thomas right?

If you meant my post then yes.

Do you think he should recuse himself because his wifes clearly a Tea Party member and the tea party wants obama care stopped?

And are you ok with Kagan staying on the case?

 

[pocketfullofshells]

If you meant my post then yes.

Do you think he should recuse himself because his wifes clearly a Tea Party member and the tea party wants obama care stopped?

And are you ok with Kagan staying on the case?

1. I meant it as a rhetorical question to the nature of the thread...how it ignores the clear question of Thomas's and only looks at the Liberal side.

2. Yes I think its very possible she should have to stand aside..Though if Thomas is not going to, I see no reason for her, given that he has a far bigger issue. And from your post, its clear you don't know the issue...Being that she is a tea bagger and they want it stopped is not the point..the key is she is Paid by a group working to stop it...His Family Income is Effected directly by this case. If a liberal Judges wife Worked for the ACLU..and the ACLU was pushing for one side of a case...would you think it was a good idea for that judge to rule on that case? If you are Honest I am pretty sure you would say no...

 

[pocketfullofshells]

it should be 9-0 b ut you are correct. not easy.

I agree, but my 9 voted the other way of you 9

 

[Pandora]

1. I meant it as a rhetorical question to the nature of the thread...how it ignores the clear question of Thomas's and only looks at the Liberal side.

2. Yes I think its very possible she should have to stand aside..Though if Thomas is not going to, I see no reason for her, given that he has a far bigger issue. And from your post, its clear you don't know the issue...Being that she is a tea bagger and they want it stopped is not the point..the key is she is Paid by a group working to stop it...His Family Income is Effected directly by this case. If a liberal Judges wife Worked for the ACLU..and the ACLU was pushing for one side of a case...would you think it was a good idea for that judge to rule on that case? If you are Honest I am pretty sure you would say no...

I did not know she was being paid. That does change my mind. If she is being paid by Tea Party people then I agree her husband should recuse himself too. I thought she was just a supporter of the Tea Party, were that the case then I would not think he should recuse himself.

and yeah, I think Kagan should recuse herself also.

 

[Little-Acorn]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...d-i-hear-they-have-votes-larry-simply-amazing

Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simply Amazing.’

By Terence P. Jeffrey
November 10, 2011

(CNSNews.com) - On Sunday, March 21, 2010, the day the House of Representatives passed President Barack Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan and famed Supreme Court litigator and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe, who was then serving in the Justice Department, had an email exchange in which they discussed the pending health-care vote, according to documents the Department of Justice released late Wednesday to the Media Research Center, CNSNews.com's parent organization, and to Judicial Watch.

“I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing,” Kagan said to Tribe in one of the emails.

The Justice Department released a new batch of emails on Wednesday evening as its latest response to Freedom of Information Act requests filed by CNSNews.com and Judicial Watch. Both organizations filed federal lawsuits against DOJ after the department did not initially respond to the requests. CNSNews.com originally filed its FOIA request on May 25, 2010--before Elena Kagan's June 2010 Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

The March 2010 email exchange between Kagan and Tribe raises new questions about whether Kagan must recuse herself from judging cases involving the health-care law that Obama signed--and which became the target of legal challenges--while Kagan was serving as Obama's solicitor general and was responsible for defending his administration’s positions in court disputes.

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

 

[pocketfullofshells]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...d-i-hear-they-have-votes-larry-simply-amazing

Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simply Amazing.’

By Terence P. Jeffrey
November 10, 2011

(CNSNews.com) - On Sunday, March 21, 2010, the day the House of Representatives passed President Barack Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan and famed Supreme Court litigator and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe, who was then serving in the Justice Department, had an email exchange in which they discussed the pending health-care vote, according to documents the Department of Justice released late Wednesday to the Media Research Center, CNSNews.com's parent organization, and to Judicial Watch.

“I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing,” Kagan said to Tribe in one of the emails.

The Justice Department released a new batch of emails on Wednesday evening as its latest response to Freedom of Information Act requests filed by CNSNews.com and Judicial Watch. Both organizations filed federal lawsuits against DOJ after the department did not initially respond to the requests. CNSNews.com originally filed its FOIA request on May 25, 2010--before Elena Kagan's June 2010 Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

The March 2010 email exchange between Kagan and Tribe raises new questions about whether Kagan must recuse herself from judging cases involving the health-care law that Obama signed--and which became the target of legal challenges--while Kagan was serving as Obama's solicitor general and was responsible for defending his administration’s positions in court disputes.

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

Im sorry Thomas did what?

 

[Pandora]

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...d-i-hear-they-have-votes-larry-simply-amazing

Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simply Amazing.’

By Terence P. Jeffrey
November 10, 2011

(CNSNews.com) - On Sunday, March 21, 2010, the day the House of Representatives passed President Barack Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan and famed Supreme Court litigator and Harvard Law Prof. Laurence Tribe, who was then serving in the Justice Department, had an email exchange in which they discussed the pending health-care vote, according to documents the Department of Justice released late Wednesday to the Media Research Center, CNSNews.com's parent organization, and to Judicial Watch.

“I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing,” Kagan said to Tribe in one of the emails.

The Justice Department released a new batch of emails on Wednesday evening as its latest response to Freedom of Information Act requests filed by CNSNews.com and Judicial Watch. Both organizations filed federal lawsuits against DOJ after the department did not initially respond to the requests. CNSNews.com originally filed its FOIA request on May 25, 2010--before Elena Kagan's June 2010 Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

The March 2010 email exchange between Kagan and Tribe raises new questions about whether Kagan must recuse herself from judging cases involving the health-care law that Obama signed--and which became the target of legal challenges--while Kagan was serving as Obama's solicitor general and was responsible for defending his administration’s positions in court disputes.

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

The law can say what ever it wants, she aint gonna do it

 

[Alias]

She defninitely needs to recuse herself. I doubt she will, however. Integrity is not found in the liberal dictionary. This is far too important to allow integrity or honor get in the way.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...d-i-hear-they-have-votes-larry-simply-amazing

 

[Little-Acorn]

I bet no she wont but and I bet the same people who are ok with that will demand that Thomas recuse himself because his wife likes the tea party

Thomas' wife Virginia works for a conservative advocacy group, that works on elections, issues scorecards for Congressmen, etc. It's safe to say that group probably doesn't like Obamacare much, and would like to see it gone.

But that's OK. It's balanced by Virginia's husband's employment. He works for a group (the U.S. Government) that also works on elections, issues a LOT of opinions on congressmen (mostly unfavorable ones on conservatives), and wants very much for Obamacare to remain in effect and even expand.

So the two Thomases balance each other out. And unlike Kagan, Clarance Thomas had nothing to do with the writing or advocacy of the Obamacare law.