Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Everyone is talking about the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare so why aren't the conservatives jumping up and down screaming about this egregious conflict of interest on the media outlets, especially their own forum like FOX NEWS? There's been mention but where's the fire in their bellies? (I'm conservative and waiting...)
This is exactly the kind of political incest that Washington is infested with on both sides of the isle and why our country is circling the drain. Americans need to get their faces out of their phones and facebook, get informed and start paying attention before its too late. (Preaching to the choir here on C-D)
Everyone is talking about the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare so why aren't the conservatives jumping up and down screaming about this egregious conflict of interest on the media outlets, especially their own forum like FOX NEWS? There's been mention but where's the fire in their bellies? (I'm conservative and waiting...)
This is exactly the kind of political incest that Washington is infested with on both sides of the isle and why our country is circling the drain. Americans need to get their faces out of their phones and facebook, get informed and start paying attention before its too late.
I am not an attorney but according to this article this issue seems pretty clear cut to me...
"According to Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 of the U.S. Code, justices must disqualify themselves in cases where they have “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 or controversy.” In United States v. Gipson, the Tenth Circuit held that judges must recuse themselves if they have “previously taken a part, albeit small, in the investigation, preparation, or prosecution of a case.” (From OP article)
She doesn't have to do anything but pay taxes and breathe air. She is a US SUPREME Court justice. Appointed for LIFE. She can choose to do what she wants and nobody can tell her to do otherwise. She cannot break the law because she IS the law.
I am not an attorney but according to this article this issue seems pretty clear cut to me...
"According to Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 of the U.S. Code, justices must disqualify themselves in cases where they have “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 or controversy.” In United States v. Gipson, the Tenth Circuit held that judges must recuse themselves if they have “previously taken a part, albeit small, in the investigation, preparation, or prosecution of a case.” (From OP article)
I'll be waiting for the OP's huffing and puffing dissertation as to why Clarence Thomas should recuse himself.
And let's not even get started about Alito and Scalia.
So then we'll have a SCOTUS decision on a 3-2 basis. Let's see who's left...Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Roberts and Sotomayor.
Hmmmm, wonder how that math stacks up for the conservatives now? So, let's keep pushing and stomping like stubborn children on the recusal issue shall we?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) 
