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

[mdk]

The anti-gay marriage folks see the writing on the wall so isn't that shocking to see these hysterical excuses are already starting to tickle in.

Oh, Sil knows what's coming. And we're going to be witness to a spectacular meltdown with a 3 month opening act. All the babble about 'tyranny' and 'nazis' is just him warming up.

And we didn't even have to buy any tickets to the show.

 

[mdk]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

 

[J.E.D]

Kagan will take part in the ruling. Gay marriage will be legal across the countries. Conservatives will still *****.

Kagan will be impeached and removed. Gay marriage will go the way of the ERA. Conservatives will be drinking champaigne in the streets.

Bwahaha holy shit you're delusional

 

[Skylar]

If Ginsburg knew that same-sex marriage were going to come before the court she should have recused herself from performing the marriage in question.

Why? There is no 'same sex marriage' in DC. There's just marriage.

How then could her performing a wedding demonstrate a bias against same sex marriage bans....when there was no same sex marriage ban?

 

[Skylar]

Kagan will take part in the ruling. Gay marriage will be legal across the countries. Conservatives will still *****.

Kagan will be impeached and removed. Gay marriage will go the way of the ERA. Conservatives will be drinking champaigne in the streets.

Bwahaha holy shit you're a delusional little half wit.

I just bookmarked Rabbi's post. We'll see who knows what in June.

 

[bodecea]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

That's ok...men said the same thing about women suffragettes. It's their ready-made excuse for women who don't knuckle under to them.

 

[Meathead]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

She is butt-ugly.

 

[bodecea]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

She is butt-ugly.

Let's see your pic.

 

[J.E.D]

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.)

'isn't a mere suggestion'?

Clearly it is merely your suggestion.


http://wisconsinlawreview.org/wp-content/files/3-Virelli.pdf
1190 WISCONSIN LAW REVIEW

Finally, Justice Scalia implies that another important reason to disfavor
recusal at the Supreme Court is to deter people (especially the press)
from seeking to discredit seemingly unsympathetic Justices in hopes of
forcing them to recuse themselves.
51
He explains that “[t]he people
must have confidence in the integrity of the Justices, and that cannot
exist in a system that assumes them to be corruptible by the slightest
friendship or favor, and in an atmosphere where the press will be eager
to find foot-faults.

Interesting article- essentially it points out that unlike judges- Justices are not answerable to anyone other than themselves.

Oh and that they get told that they should recuse themselves quite regularly, and generally ignore those calls.

Oh snap /thread

 

[mdk]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

She is butt-ugly.

Pretty shallow don't you think? I don't care if she a beauty queen or a goblin so long as she apt at her profession.

 

[Meathead]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

She is butt-ugly.

Let's see your pic.

Yeah, I know that my avatar is not the best-looking person in the world. Still though, not as butt ugly as Kagan.

 

[mdk]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

That's ok...men said the same thing about women suffragettes. It's their ready-made excuse for women who don't knuckle under to them.

I think its shallow. I disagree with many people on politics but I don't feel the need to attack their looks.

 

[Meathead]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

She is butt-ugly.

Pretty shallow don't you think? I don't care if she a beauty queen or a goblin so long as she apt at her profession.

I was talking about her appearance. She is pretty ******* ugly, eh?

 

[Jarhead]

You know you can't win this arguement on its merits so now the tactic is trying gin up outrage and claim they she should recuse herself from the case. It isn't going to happen.

You cannot deny it was poor judgment on the part of Kagan to officiate over a gay wedding with the knowledge that, as a member of the supreme court, she needs to demonstrate a lack of bias to the issue at hand....and she was well aware that gay marriage was an issue she will be faced with as a member of the supreme court.

She did not have to officiate over the wedding. She opted to.

When you accept a nomination to the supreme court, you are well aware of the limitations it will put on your life.

Very poor judgment and all it did was cast a shadow on the situation.

 

[WorldWatcher]

If Ginsburg knew that same-sex marriage were going to come before the court she should have recused herself from performing the marriage in question.

The question before the court will be can states ban same-sex civil marriage.

Justice Ginsburg performed a SSCM in D.C. which had no ban on SSCM and specifically had legislatively passed SSCM so that it was legal.

Performing a SSCM in a location where it was legal has nothing to do with a legal question of can states ban them.


>>>>

 

[bodecea]

A woman that ugly has to be gay or asexual.

Come on, you can do better than that.

She is butt-ugly.

Let's see your pic.

Yeah, I know that my avatar is not the best-looking person in the world. Still though, not as butt ugly as Kagan.

Let's see your pic.

 

[J.E.D]

this cult and its sychophant's overweening will pass the tipping point into tyranny upon the moment these two Justices appear on the gay marriage case in a couple of week's time.

But it didn't pass its tipping point when Thomas failed to recuse himself during the ACA cases. Only when gay marriage is involved. And I'm sure you would see it that way if it looked like gay marriage proponents were going to lose this one.

Naa you don't have an agenda. You're just concerned about the integrity of the Court

 

[mdk]

You know you can't win this arguement on its merits so now the tactic is trying gin up outrage and claim they she should recuse herself from the case. It isn't going to happen.

You cannot deny it was poor judgment on the part of Kagan to officiate over a gay wedding with the knowledge that, as a member of the supreme court, she needs to demonstrate a lack of bias to the issue at hand....and she was well aware that gay marriage was an issue she will be faced with as a member of the supreme court.

She did not have to officiate over the wedding. She opted to.

When you accept a nomination to the supreme court, you are well aware of the limitations it will put on your life.

Very poor judgment and all it did was cast a shadow on the situation.

Oh, I can deny it b/c I don't believe it was poor judgement. She officiated a ceremony in a jurisdiction where no such ban existed. If she had done so in state where there was a ban I would agree that she should recuse herself. The only reason the OP wants her to recuse herself is b/c she don't think Kagan is going to vote the way she wants.

 

[Jarhead]

this cult and its sychophant's overweening will pass the tipping point into tyranny upon the moment these two Justices appear on the gay marriage case in a couple of week's time.

But it didn't pass its tipping point when Thomas failed to recuse himself during the ACA cases. Only when gay marriage is involved. And I'm sure you would see it that way if it looked like gay marriage proponents were going to lose this one.

Naa you don't have an agenda. You're just concerned about the integrity of the Court

and the left did not have a agenda while defending the IRS. They always saw it as a reputable, clean agency.

 

[Meathead]

The last time I'd seen such an ugly woman was Helen Thomas, white House reporter. Ugh!