Breaking: Justice Kagan Must Recuse Herself From Upcoming Gay Marriage Hearing

[Silhouette]

In the case of Kagan, we have an unbelievable display of overt bias in addition to the shadow-bias the entire Court is displaying to the public: Justices Indicate Shadow-Bias Gay Marriage Question Erodes Last Bastion of Impariality Page 40 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is behavior unbecoming on an unsettled question of law for a US Supreme Court Justice. I just stumbled upon this today:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Elena Kagan has officiated for the first time at a same-sex wedding, a Maryland ceremony for her former law clerk and his husband.
Kagan presided on Sunday over the wedding of former clerk Mitchell Reich and Patrick Pearsall in the Washington suburb of Chevy Chase, Maryland. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan Performs Her First Same-Sex Wedding

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that elected judges must step aside from cases when large campaign contributions from interested parties create the appearance of bias...Voting 5-4 in a case from West Virginia, the high court said that a judge who remained involved in a lawsuit — one filed against a company helmed by a generous supporter of the justice's campaign — deprived the other side of the constitutional right to a fair trial.Court Judges must avoid appearance of bias - politics - Supreme Court NBC News

By the Court's 2009 Finding, Kagan must recuse herself from sitting on the upcoming Hearing on gay marriage.

 

[Steven_R]

If a judge or justice owned a gun, would they be forced to recuse themselves from gun rights cases? If they were religious or wrote a blog, would they have to step aside for First Amendment cases? What's the cut off point for judges not appearing to be biased?

 

[Syriusly]

In the case of Kagan, we have an unbelievable display of overt bias in addition to the shadow-bias the entire Court is displaying to the public: .

Breaking?

You have been claiming this same crap for days now.

Justices decide for themselves when they should recuse themselves.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I'm doubting that 2009 case will disqualify her, it's regarding donations. But there does seem to be a conflict of interest

 

[Redfish]

In the case of Kagan, we have an unbelievable display of overt bias in addition to the shadow-bias the entire Court is displaying to the public: .

Breaking?

You have been claiming this same crap for days now.

Justices decide for themselves when they should recuse themselves.

yes, its a question of judicial ethics. Does Kagan have any?

 

[Syriusly]

By the Court's 2009 Finding, Kagan must recuse herself from sitting on the upcoming Hearing on gay marriage.

The Supreme Court ruled Monday that elected judges must step aside from cases when large campaign contributions from interested parties create the appearance of bias.

This has nothing to do with the case.

'elected judges'- Supreme Court Justices are not 'elected judges'.
'large campaign contributions'- there are no large campaign contributions.

'create the appearance of bias'

That is entirely subjective- and since Supreme Court Justices decide for themselves what that means- I imagine that Kagan will proceed much like Thomas did- and not recuse herself just because you think she should.

 

[Jarhead]

In the case of Kagan, we have an unbelievable display of overt bias in addition to the shadow-bias the entire Court is displaying to the public: Justices Indicate Shadow-Bias Gay Marriage Question Erodes Last Bastion of Impariality Page 40 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is behavior unbecoming on an unsettled question of law for a US Supreme Court Justice. I just stumbled upon this today:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Justice Elena Kagan has officiated for the first time at a same-sex wedding, a Maryland ceremony for her former law clerk and his husband.
Kagan presided on Sunday over the wedding of former clerk Mitchell Reich and Patrick Pearsall in the Washington suburb of Chevy Chase, Maryland. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan Performs Her First Same-Sex Wedding

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled Monday that elected judges must step aside from cases when large campaign contributions from interested parties create the appearance of bias...Voting 5-4 in a case from West Virginia, the high court said that a judge who remained involved in a lawsuit — one filed against a company helmed by a generous supporter of the justice's campaign — deprived the other side of the constitutional right to a fair trial.Court Judges must avoid appearance of bias - politics - Supreme Court NBC News

By the Court's 2009 Finding, Kagan must recuse herself from sitting on the upcoming Hearing on gay marriage.

A judge officiating a gay marriage in a state or district where gay marriage is accepted by the government of that state or district in no way gives reason to believe that she did something based strictly on her passion for the gay marriage issue.

Does the fact that Scalia never officiated a gay wedding mean he should recluse himself?

 

[Skylar]

Maryland voted in gay marraige before Kagan officiated the ceremony.

How then could Kagan have demonstrated a bias against state gay marriage bans....when there was no state gay marriage ban in the State she officiated the wedding?

You really didn't think this through, did you Sil?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Fat Tony Scalia should be forced to recuse himself since he is openly homophobic and biased.

Scalia s Most Anti-Gay Comments - Business Insider

 

[Steven_R]

Fat Tony Scalia should be forced to recuse himself since he is openly homophobic and biased.

Wasn't he one of Phil Leotardo's men who helped beat Vito Spatafore to death when they found out he was gay?

 

[Silhouette]

Maryland voted in gay marraige before Kagan officiated the ceremony.
How then could Kagan have demonstrated a bias against state gay marriage bans....when there was no state gay marriage ban in the State she officiated the wedding?

Because Kagan is representative of the Federal Entity known as the US Supreme Court. Her public image is inseperable from her embodiment of that High Office. That was her clear indication of bias. It is unquestionable.

If a judge or justice owned a gun, would they be forced to recuse themselves from gun rights cases? If they were religious or wrote a blog, would they have to step aside for First Amendment cases? What's the cut off point for judges not appearing to be biased?

No, not if they owned one privately.

This FEDERAL US Supreme Court Justice, whose job description is simply to be unbiased and to maintain a RIGOROUS public anonymity on issues of the day OFFICATED as a FEDERAL ENTITY over a state-approved gay marriage. That is her stamp, her indication of clear public bias on the untested question of law yet to be Heard: federal presiding over state marriage. A US Supreme Court Justice is held most rigorously of all to the recusal-standard and displays of bias because they are the last stop on the tracks for American justice.

Ergo, she must step down or risk fracturing the Union.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Fat Tony Scalia should be forced to recuse himself since he is openly homophobic and biased.

Wasn't he one of Phil Leotardo's men who helped beat Vito Spatafore to death when they found out he was gay?

Given that Fat Tony Scalia is from Trenton NJ originally I would not be surprised to discover that there are mob connections in his extended "family". That doesn't make him a mobster but it does say volumes about where his homophobia comes from.

 

[mdk]

No one bought this nonsense of yours several weeks ago when you started a thread with the exact same topic. Let's be honest, you only want Kagan to recuse herself b/c you don't believe she will vote the way you wish.

 

[g5000]

In the case of Kagan, we have an unbelievable display of overt bias in addition to the shadow-bias the entire Court is displaying to the public: .

Breaking?

You have been claiming this same crap for days now.

Weeks: Justices Ginsburg And Kagan Officiated Over Same Sex Ceremonies Will Have To Recuse Themselves US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Jarhead]

If a judge or justice owned a gun, would they be forced to recuse themselves from gun rights cases? If they were religious or wrote a blog, would they have to step aside for First Amendment cases? What's the cut off point for judges not appearing to be biased?

No, not if they owned one privately.

This FEDERAL US Supreme Court Justice, whose job description is simply to be unbiased and to maintain a RIGOROUS public anonymity on issues of the day OFFICATED as a FEDERAL ENTITY over a state-approved gay marriage. That is her stamp, her indication of clear public bias on the untested question of law yet to be Heard: federal presiding over state marriage. A US Supreme Court Justice is held most rigorously of all to the recusal-standard and displays of bias because they are the last stop on the tracks for American justice.

Ergo, she must step down or risk fracturing the Union.

How does one adhering to the law by officiating over a gay wedding show bias?

 

[Jarhead]

If Kagan had refused to officiate over that wedding....would she be showing bias the other way and, again, be in a position to recluse herself?

So, if you think about it...the fact that she was approached to officiate over this wedding automatically put her in a position to have to recluse herself from any "gay" issue...for if she said yes, she is pro gay and if she said no she is a homophobe.

Sorry....I don't see it.

 

[Silhouette]

Weeks: Justices Ginsburg And Kagan Officiated Over Same Sex Ceremonies Will Have To Recuse Themselves US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

OK, BOTH Ginsburg and Kagan must recuse themselves. I stand corrected. The recusal isn't a mere suggestion, they upheld it for all judges (most especially themselves) as recently as 2009. (I think my thread is better though since mine doesn't refer to "two Jewesses" in the OP.)

 

[Silhouette]

How does one adhering to the law by officiating over a gay wedding show bias?

Easy. When one is a US Supreme Court Justice who Upheld in 2009 that no judge may sit on a case yet to be Heard for which s/he has displayed clear bias. This rule applies most rigorously to a US Supreme Court Justice.

 

[The Rabbi]

Supreme Court Justices generally do not officiate at weddings. That is not their job. The fact that she went out of her way to do so indicates a lack of impartiality. It doesnt help that she's also gay.
No, she will need to recuse.

 

[AceRothstein]

BREAKING!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA