- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
So the question, should Kagan have recused herself from this argument? I say absolutely. What say you all?
j-mac
-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simply A
- Thread starter j-mac
- Start date
So the question, should Kagan have recused herself from this argument? I say absolutely. What say you all?
j-mac
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2008
- Messages
- 41,550
- Reaction score
- 31,148
- Location
- Southern England
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
I say yet another dogwhistle from talking-point central has been sounded. Hear those Kons howl spookily in unison.
I say yet another dogwhistle from talking-point central has been sounded. Hear those Kons howl spookily in unison.
AdamT
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 17,773
- Reaction score
- 5,746
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
I would say there's a much better case for Thomas recusing himself, given the fact that he and his wife have profitted to the tune of tens, and possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars from her lobbying efforts to defeat the bill and to repeal it after it passed.
I would say there's a much better case for Thomas recusing himself, given the fact that he and his wife have profitted to the tune of tens, and possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars from her lobbying efforts to defeat the bill and to repeal it after it passed.
BWG
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2005
- Messages
- 4,373
- Reaction score
- 1,602
- Location
- South Coast
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, were feted at a dinner co-sponsored by the law firm that will argue the health care law before the high court.
The lawyer who will stand before the court and argue that the law should be thrown out is likely to be Paul Clement. Clement’s law firm, Bancroft PLLC, was one of almost two dozen firms that helped sponsor the annual dinner of the Federalist Society.
Scalia and Thomas dine with healthcare law challengers as court takes case - latimes.com
Do you think that two conservative Justices being special guests at a dinner with potential participants and known opposition to the law should be cause to recuse themselves?
The Federalist Society has been around for about 30 years and it is widely known that Scalia is a member. I don't think attending the dinner is going to influence either gentleman on this issue or any other issue from any position they may have held previously. Same for Kagan. Scalia and Thomas are conservatives, Kagan is liberal. Nothing new. Nothing unknown.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, were feted at a dinner co-sponsored by the law firm that will argue the health care law before the high court.
The lawyer who will stand before the court and argue that the law should be thrown out is likely to be Paul Clement. Clement’s law firm, Bancroft PLLC, was one of almost two dozen firms that helped sponsor the annual dinner of the Federalist Society.
Scalia and Thomas dine with healthcare law challengers as court takes case - latimes.com
Do you think that two conservative Justices being special guests at a dinner with potential participants and known opposition to the law should be cause to recuse themselves?
The Federalist Society has been around for about 30 years and it is widely known that Scalia is a member. I don't think attending the dinner is going to influence either gentleman on this issue or any other issue from any position they may have held previously. Same for Kagan. Scalia and Thomas are conservatives, Kagan is liberal. Nothing new. Nothing unknown.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
Can you show where Justice Thomas had any direct advocacy on the part of the dealings of his wife?
The statue I listed is pretty clear.
j-mac
Can you show where Justice Thomas had any direct advocacy on the part of the dealings of his wife?
The statue I listed is pretty clear.
j-mac
Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
What is about the appearences?
What is about the appearences?
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
What about them? Is that a question? Shouldn't you be just a tad more explicit in order for people to follow what you are saying? I know you like to keep it purposely vague so that you can change, and deny later what is said, or meant, or what ever, but give it a try.
j-mac
What about them? Is that a question? Shouldn't you be just a tad more explicit in order for people to follow what you are saying? I know you like to keep it purposely vague so that you can change, and deny later what is said, or meant, or what ever, but give it a try.
j-mac
Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that the concept of the appearance of impropriety was something you were unfamilar with. It's the idea that if it looks like there may be a conflict, perhaps you should recuse yourself.
Sometimes, though, even the ethical standard isn't tight enough — we must also avoid the appearance of impropriety. Although some find it frustrating, it's essential in complex societies.
On the Appearance of Impropriety
I'm sorry. I didn't realize that the concept of the appearance of impropriety was something you were unfamilar with. It's the idea that if it looks like there may be a conflict, perhaps you should recuse yourself.
Sometimes, though, even the ethical standard isn't tight enough — we must also avoid the appearance of impropriety. Although some find it frustrating, it's essential in complex societies.
On the Appearance of Impropriety
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
Well now, isn't that convenient for your argument here...Like I said though, I provided a statute, and a link to that statute. Stick to facts and don't sway to appearances when you have argued the exact opposite before, in different matters.
So, just tell me which standard you believe in, and we can go from there.
j-mac
Well now, isn't that convenient for your argument here...Like I said though, I provided a statute, and a link to that statute. Stick to facts and don't sway to appearances when you have argued the exact opposite before, in different matters.
So, just tell me which standard you believe in, and we can go from there.
j-mac
Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
And I linked what I'm talking about. Do you have the same standard for both, or only the one you don't want to rule. I've called for neither to step aside. You?
And I linked what I'm talking about. Do you have the same standard for both, or only the one you don't want to rule. I've called for neither to step aside. You?
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
OMG, it is like debating with Pee Wee Herman.
j-mac
OMG, it is like debating with Pee Wee Herman.
j-mac
Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
Your way of saying you can't answer, so you won't. I can link for you a law piece if you like that argues we can be too silly with these efforts to recuse someone. It is what I'm trying to get at. I know like many, you only want to be tol you're right and have in end there. But I prefer a more indepth discussion. It could be we're both wrong.
Your way of saying you can't answer, so you won't. I can link for you a law piece if you like that argues we can be too silly with these efforts to recuse someone. It is what I'm trying to get at. I know like many, you only want to be tol you're right and have in end there. But I prefer a more indepth discussion. It could be we're both wrong.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
Well, that is always possible Joe. Look, I'll tell ya, I think that Kagen should recuse herself due to her predisposition to the case before her, and if she were honest she would do so. I also think that Thomas due to his wifes work has some issues and should bow out. but either both do, or neither....Fair enough?
j-mac
Well, that is always possible Joe. Look, I'll tell ya, I think that Kagen should recuse herself due to her predisposition to the case before her, and if she were honest she would do so. I also think that Thomas due to his wifes work has some issues and should bow out. but either both do, or neither....Fair enough?
j-mac
Boo Radley
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2009
- Messages
- 37,066
- Reaction score
- 7,028
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
As that is what I was arguing, yep. We have reached agreement.
I will, however, add one more thing. To believe that there is even one on any court that doesn't have predispsition to any case is kind of wishful thinking. At best, they should try to keep an open mind. Some are more able to listen dispite leaning a certain way than others, and I'm not all that sure we can tell who just by how well they hide or don't hide their disposition. But the school of law they come from, how they read laws, read the wrokd before them, see the world will influence their view. now, not divorced from the law. They will look at the law. But the law is never as clear as many think it is. It's a mistake many make in believing that words are always read the same by everyone. One of the reasons laws seem so convoluted is because of the effort to try and clarify. But anyone who has given what they think is simple instructions to someone only to see them mess it up knows that nothing can be perfectly clear to anyone.
As that is what I was arguing, yep. We have reached agreement.
I will, however, add one more thing. To believe that there is even one on any court that doesn't have predispsition to any case is kind of wishful thinking. At best, they should try to keep an open mind. Some are more able to listen dispite leaning a certain way than others, and I'm not all that sure we can tell who just by how well they hide or don't hide their disposition. But the school of law they come from, how they read laws, read the wrokd before them, see the world will influence their view. now, not divorced from the law. They will look at the law. But the law is never as clear as many think it is. It's a mistake many make in believing that words are always read the same by everyone. One of the reasons laws seem so convoluted is because of the effort to try and clarify. But anyone who has given what they think is simple instructions to someone only to see them mess it up knows that nothing can be perfectly clear to anyone.
AdamT
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2011
- Messages
- 17,773
- Reaction score
- 5,746
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Re: Kagan to Tribe on Day Obamacare Passed: ‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simp
You're right, the statute IS pretty clear!
28 U.S.C. § 455 : US Code - Section 455: Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States
shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his
impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following
circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceeding;
...
(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his
spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial
interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to
the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially
affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of
relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or
trustee of a party;
(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv) Is to the judge's knowledge likely to be a material
witness in the proceeding."
Leaving aside Thomas' frequent, all-expenses-paid speeches to conservative groups who oppose HCR, there is no question that his makes lots of money lobbying against HCR. Her income, and therefore his income, depends in part on her success in defeating the measure. It's what we call a no brainer.
There is a far weaker case for Kagan's recusal. Legal Ethicists Throw Cold Water On Latest Attempt To Kick Kagan Off Health Care Case | Media Matters for America
You're right, the statute IS pretty clear!
28 U.S.C. § 455 : US Code - Section 455: Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States
shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his
impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following
circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceeding;
...
(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his
spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial
interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to
the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially
affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of
relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or
trustee of a party;
(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv) Is to the judge's knowledge likely to be a material
witness in the proceeding."
Leaving aside Thomas' frequent, all-expenses-paid speeches to conservative groups who oppose HCR, there is no question that his makes lots of money lobbying against HCR. Her income, and therefore his income, depends in part on her success in defeating the measure. It's what we call a no brainer.
There is a far weaker case for Kagan's recusal. Legal Ethicists Throw Cold Water On Latest Attempt To Kick Kagan Off Health Care Case | Media Matters for America