Email Released Shows Elana Kagan Celebrating Obamacare's Passage

[USArmyRetired]

The only reason she's on SCOTUS in the first place is payback for covering for Obama at Harvard.

Kagan = Recuse

You are exactly correct on that issue. She should have never been appointed. She didn't have the qualifications.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

The only reason she's on SCOTUS in the first place is payback for covering for Obama at Harvard.

Kagan = Recuse

You are exactly correct on that issue. She should have never been appointed. She didn't have the qualifications.

What could a Dean of the Harvard Law school - one of the worst in the land - possibly know about the law?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The only reason she's on SCOTUS in the first place is payback for covering for Obama at Harvard.

Kagan = Recuse

Why? Because you don't like her? All Justices that CrusaderFrank does not like must recuse themselves!

Kagan = Recuse.

Or impeached

Sotomoyor too for lying under oath about her support of gun rights

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Kagan = Recuse.

Why?

 

[USArmyRetired]

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.”


Kagan MUST recuse herself.

 

[Inthemiddle]

She never expressed an opinion on the case.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Kagan needs to recuse herself.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Yes, say it again. Repetition breeds truth.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

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.”


Kagan MUST recuse herself.

Its quite clear that Kagan could not have POSSIBLY expressed an opinion on the merits of the cases being considered - AS THEY DID NOT EXIST YET.

You've got some severe reading comprehension problems!!!

 

[CaféAuLait]

Should Justice Kagan Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Case?


Should Justice Kagan Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Case?


Good article, weighs both sides.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Kagan needs to recuse herself.

Well she didn't. Now what? Stomp your feet and yell? Maybe throw some things across the room?

 

[CaféAuLait]

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.”


Kagan MUST recuse herself.

Its quite clear that Kagan could not have POSSIBLY expressed an opinion on the merits of the cases being considered - AS THEY DID NOT EXIST YET.

You've got some severe reading comprehension problems!!!

Of greater concern, in my view, is a separate email exchange on March 21, 2010 (the day PPACA was passing the House) with her top deputy Neal Katyal. Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli had send a message to a group of DOJ lawyers, including Katyal, notifying them that there was going to be a meeting the next day to plan for the litigation expected to challenge PPACA. Kagan was included in the mailing, which would seem to confirm her offices involvement in the litigation planning. As head of that office, it raises a serious appearance problem and may reflect additional conversations that could have occurred between her and Katyal or other lawyers in effort. This was already one of the top priorities of the Administration and one would expect a comprehensive team at Justice Department that would include the Solicitor General’s office.

Should Justice Kagan Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Case?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

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.”


Kagan MUST recuse herself.

Its quite clear that Kagan could not have POSSIBLY expressed an opinion on the merits of the cases being considered - AS THEY DID NOT EXIST YET.

You've got some severe reading comprehension problems!!!

Of greater concern, in my view, is a separate email exchange on March 21, 2010 (the day PPACA was passing the House) with her top deputy Neal Katyal. Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli had send a message to a group of DOJ lawyers, including Katyal, notifying them that there was going to be a meeting the next day to plan for the litigation expected to challenge PPACA. Kagan was included in the mailing, which would seem to confirm her offices involvement in the litigation planning. As head of that office, it raises a serious appearance problem and may reflect additional conversations that could have occurred between her and Katyal or other lawyers in effort. This was already one of the top priorities of the Administration and one would expect a comprehensive team at Justice Department that would include the Solicitor General’s office.

Should Justice Kagan Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Case?

"included in the mailing" and therefore must have been involved? LOL! Do you even use email for work? I WISH the only emails I was "included in the mailing" for were ones I was involved with!

Either way - it doesn't matter - as it is clear above that it requires she have expressed an opinion on a PARTICULAR case. A potential unnamed and, at the time, future case that had not been brought yet is not a PARTICULAR case.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Its quite clear that Kagan could not have POSSIBLY expressed an opinion on the merits of the cases being considered - AS THEY DID NOT EXIST YET.

You've got some severe reading comprehension problems!!!

Of greater concern, in my view, is a separate email exchange on March 21, 2010 (the day PPACA was passing the House) with her top deputy Neal Katyal. Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli had send a message to a group of DOJ lawyers, including Katyal, notifying them that there was going to be a meeting the next day to plan for the litigation expected to challenge PPACA. Kagan was included in the mailing, which would seem to confirm her offices involvement in the litigation planning. As head of that office, it raises a serious appearance problem and may reflect additional conversations that could have occurred between her and Katyal or other lawyers in effort. This was already one of the top priorities of the Administration and one would expect a comprehensive team at Justice Department that would include the Solicitor General’s office.

Should Justice Kagan Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Case?

"included in the mailing" and therefore must have been involved? LOL! Do you even use email for work? I WISH the only emails I was "included in the mailing" for were ones I was involved with!

Either way - it doesn't matter - as it is clear above that it requires she have expressed an opinion on a PARTICULAR case. A potential unnamed and, at the time, future case that had not been brought yet is not a PARTICULAR case.

I guess you are unaware that the Justice department and Kagan refuse to release all the documents and emails.


You should read the article I linked to, it has pro and cons. It makes an argument for her not recusing herself and reasons why she might have to.

If that’s true then that may be enough to deal with this issue and answer the questions. But yet, as Turley notes, there is that email conversation, and there is the fact that Justice is refusing to release any more documents. At the very least, it strikes me that those documents should be released. If it’s true that Kagan wasn’t involved in litigation planning then the documents should reflect that. If they show that she was, however, then it strikes me that she may need to recuse herself

"The case" as you keep referring to it did not have to be a active case per se, but something that she was aware of such as the fact that she was aware of this possibly becoming a case. It is not that hard to figure out, really.

 

[USArmyRetired]

Its quite clear that Kagan could not have POSSIBLY expressed an opinion on the merits of the cases being considered - AS THEY DID NOT EXIST YET.

You've got some severe reading comprehension problems!!!

Of greater concern, in my view, is a separate email exchange on March 21, 2010 (the day PPACA was passing the House) with her top deputy Neal Katyal. Associate Attorney General Tom Perrelli had send a message to a group of DOJ lawyers, including Katyal, notifying them that there was going to be a meeting the next day to plan for the litigation expected to challenge PPACA. Kagan was included in the mailing, which would seem to confirm her offices involvement in the litigation planning. As head of that office, it raises a serious appearance problem and may reflect additional conversations that could have occurred between her and Katyal or other lawyers in effort. This was already one of the top priorities of the Administration and one would expect a comprehensive team at Justice Department that would include the Solicitor General’s office.

Should Justice Kagan Recuse Herself From Health Care Reform Case?

"included in the mailing" and therefore must have been involved? LOL! Do you even use email for work? I WISH the only emails I was "included in the mailing" for were ones I was involved with!

Either way - it doesn't matter - as it is clear above that it requires she have expressed an opinion on a PARTICULAR case. A potential unnamed and, at the time, future case that had not been brought yet is not a PARTICULAR case.

Looks like a hearing needs to be called and supoena witnesses to see what opinion she had.

 

[Lakhota]

Yeah, they can grill Kagan after they finish with Thomas.

 

[CaféAuLait]

Yeah, they can grill Kagan after they finish with Thomas.

Thomas because his wife has ties? If this had been Robert's working for the Bush admin and also acting solicitor general when a case of this magnitude went down I can hear the left bitching now. LOL Let alone he wrote emails applauding the passage of whatever law AND especially if the Bush Justice department refused to hand over all the documents and paperwork to prove that Roberts had nothing to do with the case.

Why not release all the documents and emails if Kagan has nothing to worry about and did not work on the HC law?

 

[candycorn]

is glenn rice still celebrating sarah's passage?

Yuk...thanks for that image.

 

[candycorn]

Scalia has already set the precedent that Supreme Court Justices can ignore requirements for recusal.

Elaborate. Give facts or a link.

First answer me this:

Q: Why the FUCK is the memory of the right wing so fucking SHORT?

Gore V. Bush in 2000.

 

[Conservative]

From the article:

[Scalia concluded friendship alone did not meet that standard.

"Why would that result follow from my being in a sizable group of persons, in a hunting camp with the vice president, where I never hunted with him in the same blind or had other opportunity for private conversation?"

Scalia said that he did not remember being alone with Cheney and that they never discussed the case.]

There is nothing on record showing that Scalia discussing the case or anything pertaining to it. He was in the clear. Here we have conclusive proof in a email where Kagan discussed Obamacare and showing her joy that it passed. She must recuse herself.

Great. So all Kagan has to do is write a letter where she concludes her impartiality will not be affected. NEXT PLEASE

Really? Did Scalia express any opinions on Cheney?

Administration emails recently obtained by the conservative CNSNews.com through a Freedom of Information Act request show Kagan telling a former colleague "I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing," regarding the reform bill. The emails have rekindled calls for Kagan to recuse herself from ruling on the healthcare reform law next year because of a provision of the U.S. code that calls on justices to disqualify themselves when they have "expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy" while in government service.

Sessions presses Holder on Justice Kagan's involvement with health law - The Hill's Healthwatch

she expressed an opinion on the merits of the issue while in government service.... Grounds to require her to recuse.