One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander!
Oct 29, 2020 10:18:30   #
ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa
 
So our new "conservative" Justice should recuse herself on anything about the election??? Well - read thi about Kagan and her non-recusal concerning Obamacare:
"Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans asked if she had “ever been asked about [her] opinion” or “offered any view or comments” concerning “the underlying legal or constitutional issued related to any proposed health care legislation, including but not limited to Pub. L. No. 111-148 [ObamaCare], or the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to potential litigation resulting from such legislation.” Kagan’s answer was an unqualified “no.”
The newly released emails, however, show that days before the House vote on the healthcare legislation, Kagan was indeed involved in preparing the Department of Justice response to a legal challenge of the bill. This challenge was anticipated by Mark Levin and the Landmark Legal Foundation if the bill was passed through a House procedural rule which would have deemed the bill to have passed the House of Representatives, even if its members had never actually voted on its last version.
Federal statute 28 U.S.C. 455 requires any member of the Supreme Court to recuse himself or herself from any proceeding in which his [or her] partiality might reasonably be questioned or if he or she had expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy [while serving] in government employment. Department of Justice lawyers insisted that the email record would show that Kagan had been “walled off” or secluded from such proceedings. However, when Mark Levin who served in the Justice Department under President Reagan reviewed the emails, he discovered that Kagan had freely discussed issues related to the proposed healthcare legislation and the subject of its being “deemed passed.” He commented:
If she had been “walled off” from the matter, where is the evidence for that? Who was the gatekeeper? In fact, the emails demonstrate that her subordinates were ensuring that she was kept informed about events and potential legal issues, including Landmark’s draft complaint, which was prepared to challenge the Slaughter rule and then-Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi’s attempt (albeit abandoned) to bypass the Constitution’s law-making requirements. At a minimum, it does not appear that Kagan was forthright during her confirmation testimony about the extent to which she was kept apprised of Obamacare."
What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander!! Let ACB rule on the election if it comes up.

| Reply
Oct 29, 2020 10:26:29   #
Lonewolf
 
ldsuttonjr wrote:
So our new "conservative" Justice should recuse herself on anything about the election??? Well - read thi about Kagan and her non-recusal concerning Obamacare:
"Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans asked if she had “ever been asked about [her] opinion” or “offered any view or comments” concerning “the underlying legal or constitutional issued related to any proposed health care legislation, including but not limited to Pub. L. No. 111-148 [ObamaCare], or the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to potential litigation resulting from such legislation.” Kagan’s answer was an unqualified “no.”
The newly released emails, however, show that days before the House vote on the healthcare legislation, Kagan was indeed involved in preparing the Department of Justice response to a legal challenge of the bill. This challenge was anticipated by Mark Levin and the Landmark Legal Foundation if the bill was passed through a House procedural rule which would have deemed the bill to have passed the House of Representatives, even if its members had never actually voted on its last version.
Federal statute 28 U.S.C. 455 requires any member of the Supreme Court to recuse himself or herself from any proceeding in which his [or her] partiality might reasonably be questioned or if he or she had expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy [while serving] in government employment. Department of Justice lawyers insisted that the email record would show that Kagan had been “walled off” or secluded from such proceedings. However, when Mark Levin who served in the Justice Department under President Reagan reviewed the emails, he discovered that Kagan had freely discussed issues related to the proposed healthcare legislation and the subject of its being “deemed passed.” He commented:
If she had been “walled off” from the matter, where is the evidence for that? Who was the gatekeeper? In fact, the emails demonstrate that her subordinates were ensuring that she was kept informed about events and potential legal issues, including Landmark’s draft complaint, which was prepared to challenge the Slaughter rule and then-Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi’s attempt (albeit abandoned) to bypass the Constitution’s law-making requirements. At a minimum, it does not appear that Kagan was forthright during her confirmation testimony about the extent to which she was kept apprised of Obamacare."
What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander!! Let ACB rule on the election if it comes up.
So our new "conservative" Justice should... (show quote)


I think trump will be disappointed in her she's not going to be a conservative rubber stamp like trump wants .

| Reply
Oct 29, 2020 11:53:46   #
manning5 Loc: Richmond, VA
 
Lonewolf wrote:
I think trump will be disappointed in her she's not going to be a conservative rubber stamp like trump wants .


Two comments: 1) it is far too early to characterize Barrett; and 2) Not all issues are from the conservative side, many are simply of national importance or precedent, and must be treated as such.

| Reply
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2020 IDF International Technologies, Inc.