Appeals court upholds Obama health care law, Reagan appointee writes court's opinion

[Tater]

What are the conflicts?

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/11/groups-suggest-elena-kagan-clarence-thomas-should-be-recused-from-health-law-decision/



Carrie Severino, a former clerk of Justice Thomas and the chief counsel of the conservative group Judicial Crisis Network called for the recusal of Kagan citing her previous job as Solicitor General of the Obama administration. Severino said Kagan’s office was “responsible for formulating the administration’s defense” of the health care law.



“Thomas should recuse himself because his wife is a lobbyist for groups that are opposed to the health care law. She has brought in a lot of money in family income opposing the health care law, ” he said. “Thomas has a financial family interest in the success of the opposition to health care. ”

 

[MassHavoc]

Wow, that is pretty big, but at the same time, I kind of feel like the whole point of them being the supreme court justices is that they are supposed to be the best at their job. And to have to recuse themselves would mean that they aren't able to be impartial and do their job. Which makes me wonder if they are the best person for the job in the first place.

 

[BigPete]

Wow, that is pretty big, but at the same time, I kind of feel like the whole point of them being the supreme court justices is that they are supposed to be the best at their job. And to have to recuse themselves would mean that they aren't able to be impartial and do their job. Which makes me wonder if they are the best person for the job in the first place.

How do you get anyone to prove that they will be impartial? That is a semi-rhetorical question. You simply have to take their word. You can check their record if you want but you will never really know for sure because anyone can change their mind and go against their word at any time.

 

[winos5]

Regardless, recusal is at the judgement of the individual Supreme Court Justice. They can't be forced to recuse themselves. For something that will fundamentally change the healthcare of the nation, not to mention the ability of congress to force citizens to purchase a commercial commodity I think I want all 9 justices considering it. This will be a landmark decision either way it falls. The sooner they rule, the better off we all are either way it goes.

 

[IceHogsFan]

Regardless, recusal is at the judgement of the individual Supreme Court Justice. They can't be forced to recuse themselves. For something that will fundamentally change the healthcare of the nation, not to mention the ability of congress to force citizens to purchase a commercial commodity I think I want all 9 justices considering it. This will be a landmark decision either way it falls. The sooner they rule, the better off we all are either way it goes.

I am not confident with the decision that is likely going to happen in June next year. From those that are involved in this case from a law perspective, including those that are opposed to the commerce clause being contested and its application to mandate individual coverage, it does not sound like the SC will overturn the law based upon that area.



I do not have a law degree but if this law is not overturned it is scary the precedent it establishes in our country. At least from what I am reading and the future implications it could have in regards to the federal government mandating more and more upon us citizens.