• 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!

Supreme Court justices, recusal, and the Code of Conduct for United States Judges

JacksinPA

JacksinPA

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Dec 3, 2017
Messages
26,290
Reaction score
16,771
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
https://abaforlawstudents.com/2018/...es-recusal-code-conduct-united-states-judges/

Supreme Court Justices and Recusal

Justice Roberts also described how the Justices decide whether to recuse themselves from certain matters:

…The Justices follow the same general principles respecting recusal as other federal judges, but the application of those principles can differ due to the unique circumstances of the Supreme Court….

He also cited to Title 28 Section 455 of the U.S. Code that addresses judicial disqualification under circumstances where the judge’s impartiality might be questioned or where he/she has a personal bias or prejudice.
==================================================================
Kavanagh was hand picked by Trump & is being extensively groomed & coached by WH staff at Trump's direction in preparation for the final hearing & vote on his nomination. This presents a clear conflict of interest & a personal bias toward Trump. If matters relating to Trump come before the SCOTUS, Kavanagh must recuse himself under the terms of U.S. Code Title 28 Section 455 (attached). If he doesn't, citizens groups could bring suit to force this issue.

Title 28 P455.jpg
 
Last edited:
JacksinPA said:
https://abaforlawstudents.com/2018/...es-recusal-code-conduct-united-states-judges/

Supreme Court Justices and Recusal

Justice Roberts also described how the Justices decide whether to recuse themselves from certain matters:

…The Justices follow the same general principles respecting recusal as other federal judges, but the application of those principles can differ due to the unique circumstances of the Supreme Court….

He also cited to Title 28 Section 455 of the U.S. Code that addresses judicial disqualification under circumstances where the judge’s impartiality might be questioned or where he/she has a personal bias or prejudice.
==================================================================
Kavanagh was hand picked by Trump & is being extensively groomed & coached by WH staff at Trump's direction in preparation for the final hearing & vote on his nomination. This presents a clear conflict of interest & a personal bias toward Trump. If matters relating to Trump come before the SCOTUS, Kavanagh must recuse himself under the terms of U.S. Code Title 28 Section 455 (attached). If he doesn't, citizens groups could bring suit to force this issue.

View attachment 67240951
Click to expand...

Wrong. A misinterpretation of your own citation. :doh

By your argument every Justice appointed by each President would be required to "recuse themselves" simply because that President worked to get them appointed. :roll:

There must be a clear case of bias for such a recusal to occur, and the members will discuss this when reviewing cases submitted to the Court for their consideration.

Thousands of appeals come before the SCOTUS each year, they actually hear a fraction.

The presumption, sans actual evidence of a conflict of interest or bias, is that each Justice is trusted to render a decision based on the law and precedent.
 
Last edited:
Captain Adverse said:
Wrong. By your argument every Justice appointed by each President would be required to "recuse themselves" simply because that President worked to get them appointed. :roll:

There must be a clear case of bias for such a recusal to occur, and the members will discuss this when reviewing cases submitted to the Court for their consideration.

Thousands of appeals come before the SCOTUS each year, they actually hear a fraction.

The presumption, sans actual evidence of a conflict of interest or bias, is that each Justice will act to render a decision based on the law and precedent.
Click to expand...

But there is clear bias in this case due to Trump having selected Kavanagh due to his decisions regarding the freedom of sitting presidents from being investigated or impeached. This is no secret but clearly an arrangement, spoken or not, to influence the SCOTUS in Trump's favor if actions are brought against him that Kavanagh has already made clear he is against. There are no secrets here. Both Trump & Kavanagh know what's going on here. That is why Trump & the judiciary are so anxious to get him nominated ASAP. Mueller is breathing down Trump's neck & he feels a draft. The Trump/Kavanagh deal is like a quid pro quo.
 
Last edited:
JacksinPA said:
But there is clear bias in this case due to Trump having selected Kavanagh due to his decisions regarding the freedom of sitting presidents from being investigated or impeached. This is no secret but clearly an arrangement, spoken or not, to influence the SCOTUS in Trump's favor if actions are brought against him that Kavanagh has already made clear he is against. There are no secrets here. Both Trump & Kavanagh know what's going on here. That is why Trump & the judiciary are so anxious to get him nominated ASAP. Mueller is breathing down Trump's neck & he feels a draft.
Click to expand...

Your arguments belong in the conspiracy sub-forum.

They are unfounded allegations based on your own bias. So because Trump doesn't want to succumb to last minute pressure from Democrats to withdraw the name of a nominee, one he openly notified the entire nation via his short-list selected from his long-list of potential candidates, this indicates a special bias on the part of Kavanaugh?

Again, the PRESUMPTION is that once appointed to the SCOTUS the Justice will rule after applying the law and precedent fairly. Bias/and or conflict of interst must be shown on a case by case basis.

Just because you SAY a thing that you believe is so, does not, in fact, make it so. :shrug:
 
JacksinPA said:
https://abaforlawstudents.com/2018/...es-recusal-code-conduct-united-states-judges/

Supreme Court Justices and Recusal

Justice Roberts also described how the Justices decide whether to recuse themselves from certain matters:

…The Justices follow the same general principles respecting recusal as other federal judges, but the application of those principles can differ due to the unique circumstances of the Supreme Court….

He also cited to Title 28 Section 455 of the U.S. Code that addresses judicial disqualification under circumstances where the judge’s impartiality might be questioned or where he/she has a personal bias or prejudice.
==================================================================
Kavanagh was hand picked by Trump & is being extensively groomed & coached by WH staff at Trump's direction in preparation for the final hearing & vote on his nomination. This presents a clear conflict of interest & a personal bias toward Trump. If matters relating to Trump come before the SCOTUS, Kavanagh must recuse himself under the terms of U.S. Code Title 28 Section 455 (attached). If he doesn't, citizens groups could bring suit to force this issue.

View attachment 67240951
Click to expand...

More left hypocrisy.


Elena Kagen HELPED AUTHOR the ACA; didn't see her RECUSE HERSELF from the USSC decision on it , did we?
 
Captain Adverse said:
Your arguments belong in the conspiracy sub-forum.

They are unfounded allegations based on your own bias. So because Trump doesn't want to succumb to last minute pressure from Democrats to withdraw the name of a nominee, one he openly notified the entire nation via his short-list selected from his long-list of potential candidates, this indicates a special bias on the part of Kavanaugh?

Again, the PRESUMPTION is that once appointed to the SCOTUS the Justice will rule after applying the law and precedent fairly. Bias/and or conflict of interst must be shown on a case by case basis.

Just because you SAY a thing that you believe is so, does not, in fact, make it so. :shrug:
Click to expand...

Here you go:

https://www.businessinsider.com/brett-kavanaugh-opinions-on-impeachment-and-indictment-2018-7

Brett Kavanaugh, who President Donald Trump nominated to replace the retiring Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy, previously contributed to a 1998 report that made a case for President Bill Clinton's impeachment.

This experience has shaped Kavanaugh's belief that presidents should not be indicted or distracted by investigations while in office.

"Whether the Constitution allows indictment of a sitting President is debatable," he has said.
========================================
Trump is putting him in as his firewall. No fair playing with the Constitution like that, picking & choosing your verdict down the line.
 
This thread is worthless. Since Congress is who could remove a Supreme Court Justice, then in the OPer's logic the SCOTUS (nor any other federal judge) could ever hear any case involving any Congressional laws or legislation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom