E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
Political groups are applying pressure to two of the U.S. Supreme Court's nine justices before they hear a series of cases challenging the constitutionality of President Obama's signature health reform law.
Conservative groups want to prevent Justice Elena Kagan from being among the members of the court to decide the case, which the justices announced on Monday they would hear this term. And liberal groups, similarly, want Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from the case.
Their demands reflect the gamesmanship surrounding the case, which would either offer legal vindication for Obama's law, or hand Republicans a victory in dismantling it -- at the height of the election season, no less, since a decision is due in June.
Republicans have already demanded that Kagan sit out the case because of her work as solicitor general in the Obama administration during the fight over the health care law. Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch (R), a longtime staple of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has demanded that she recuse herself, and House Republicans have sought to probe the extent of her involvement in crafting the legal defense for the law.
Kagan said in written responses to questions during her confirmation process to the court that she would recuse herself "from any case in which I've been counsel of record" or in any case in which she had "played any kind of substantial role in the process." She said in her confirmation testimony that she had attended at least one meeting where pending litigation against the health law might have been discussed, but "none where any substantive discussion of the litigation occurred."
The Judicial Confirmation Network and Judicial Watch, both conservative legal groups, have called for Kagan to recuse herself. Even if she doesn't sit out the case, it would provide the right-leaning groups with a way to spin an unfavorable opinion, especially if the decision comes along slim margins.
But Kagan isn't the only target. If conservatives have urged her recusal for fear of her reliably liberal vote, then it's concern about Thomas's usually-conservative voting record that prompted liberals to urge his recusal.
Seventy-three House Democrats, led by then-Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY), wrote earlier this year that Thomas should recuse himself because of his wife's work with Tea Party groups in opposition to the law. The Democrats charged that Ginni Thomas had previously been compensated in part for her work against health care reform; the liberal Magazine Mother jones reported that she had received $150,000 in compensation from Liberty Central, a group opposed to the reform law, according to her husband's financial disclosure forms.
Health Care for America Now is also among the liberal groups to have joined the demand for Thomas's recusal.
All indications, though, point toward recusals for neither, meaning all nine justices would participate.
If there were to be recusals, we'd know by now. The fact that the court granted the health care cases yesterday without noting that any justice "took no part in the consideration" tell us that. But this has been clear for quite a while, because the court has handled other health care cases in past months -- such as the refusal to grant fast-track status to the case brought by the State of Virginia -- without noting any recusals.
Moreover, there's some thought that the dividing lines between "conservative" and "liberal" justices might not even apply in any usual way. For instance, Judge Laurence Silberman, the appeals court judge in D.C. who authored an opinion upholding the constitutionality of health reform, was appointed to the court by President Reagan, and has been active in the Federalist Society, a conservative legal society.
NBC's Pete Williams contributed reporting.
Leave a Comment:
Both Thomas and Scalia should recuse themselves. Thomas and his wife should be facing tax evasion charges from the IRS. How can you forget to disclose for 6 years that your wife had made nearly a million dollars from her anti healthcare activities? Both of these judges have been on the Koch brothers gravy train for years and should be removed from the bench. Time to do away with lifetime membership on the high court and they need to be subject to oversight because right now they can get away with murder.There also needs to be a more defined mechanism for removing corrupt justices from the bench as well.
Timothy Geithner is the Secretary of the Treasury and failed to pay his taxes so we would need to file tax evasion charges on him as well. And He is the one responsible for enforcing tax law. Go figure.
Hey Chris: ....There needs to be a more defined mechanism for removing corrupt justices......
Take a long look at this website then tell me if we shouldn't have a better way to block Presidential appointments. http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/obama-surrounds-himself-with-the-most-extreme-appointees-in-american-history/
I'm not a certified WH historian but I'd bet a bundle there's never been such a large bundle of shady characters under one roof since the WH was built. I still chuckle when I think of Van Jones actually thinking he could slide in and not be noticed. Thanks again, Glen Beck.
Those asking Thomas to recuse himself are grasping at straws. Kagan was directly involved in fashioning a defense for this law and she obviously must recuse herself. There is no comparison with someone's spouse expressing their own beliefs as with the Thomas case. The left is just trying to find something to have a justice with more conservative beliefs stay off the case because they know Kagan must ethically not be part of this decision.
Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, and that other joker that is a corporate hack should all recuse themselves. None of them has been judicial, objective or reasoned in their decisions because they are right wing activist ideaolgues who are so elitist and biased toward wealth, corporations and right wing radicalism that they can see only one side and it isn't the side that is concerned with American ideals, fairness, justice, precedent, or fairness. Citizen's United is just one example of many where they all ignored nearly a century of case law and the Constitution to grant corporations personhood against the most glaring reality that they are the antithesis of persons and their interests are hostile to those of real people.
Yeah Robert, that way only libtards get hear the case. Is that the only way this law will keep being law, is if ALL of the conservitives on the court recuse them selfs? Good Law?
They can not sit it out due to the pressure of any political party. That's tampering with the highest court in the land and should not be tolerated. It has already been voted on by congress, end of story. Now it's up to the Supreme Court, end of story.
Nobody will be recusing from this controversy. The health care mandate is a fundamental constitutional question and all hands will be needed on deck. This decision doesn't involve any specific interest which may or may not pose a conflict of interest for a particular justice. This recusal garbage is nothing but a lame attempt to "lobby" the Supreme Court, and our system just doesn't work that way.
The written word is a beautiful thing, but you have to actually remember it and understand it. In the article above, you missed the reality.
In Kagan's confirmation hearing, she "said in her confirmation testimony that she had attended at least one meeting where pending litigation against the health law might have been discussed, but "none where any substantive discussion of the litigation occurred."
This means what it says and that she is not part of any decisions and not tied to the mandatory clause. the remarks were made in he confirmation hearing and she was confirmed including them their impact.
On Thomas, his wife's monetary compensation is part of his joint financial picture. Since it is enhanced by the very people who are bringing the case, he is ethically encouraged to recuse.
Financially, both Thomas and Scalia are shown to be enhanced, and Alito is certainly likely to have the same ethical problems.
The crux of the issue is that those who are ethically challenged will neither abide by nor understand the ethics.
I'm tired of the people who post nothing but bald assertions without any evidence, factual support, knowledge, or even a reasonable belief. You're not adding value to the conversation, mostly just venting your emotional instability. Thanks but no thanks. Stay out of it if you don't have anything intelligent to say.
Put Hatch up for Treason. Keep your hands and big mouth off the Supreme Court. Let them do their job.
healthcare should be free, and the rich should pay for it.
Every pays their way where I am from.
you got that right mscarborough.They went through the process to make it there.Suppose to have a full panel.
Obama's health care reform needs strong reforming. I agree with the person who said Justices should be voted in by the people, not the political population. Rest assured, when a Justice is inaugurated into the Supreme Court, the person putting him/her there does have a political agenda and is pretty much assured as to how his appointee will vote.
IF this Court accepts the legalities of the Obama health care law, then they have not looked at the picture from a legal standpoint. It will be politically voted on. In today's world, you can't trust anyone who has a government attachment. I like CT and Scalia, etc., as I thought they showed conservatiism when they were being brought on board in the Supreme Court. I hope they keep their minds open and won't allow politics to sway their vote. After all, that health care law affects all US citizens (and probably some who aren't citizens).
The changes I have already seen that lean to the health care law are outrageous. The words 'if you are 59 and over, you will pay for being sick with your life' (not a quote) is already happening. You might just live many years longer if the doctors and health care providers took good care of your ailments, instead of letting them pile up to the point of 'you're dead'.
Hospitals are starting to take over Medicare's responsibility of approving or denying claims, and if the hospital decides Medicare won't cover the claim, they have you sign a sheet that says, "you agree to pay for the service in full". They best not ever put that form in my face again, as someone will pay a heavier price for their stupid decisions. One hospital here decided Medicare wouldn't cover my procedure, so the Billing Unit filed the claim with Medicare stating I "had agreed to pay all costs in full out of my pocket". That's totally insane. (By the way, the hospital ended up eating the $1,000.. as they forged my signature onto the form.) I don't carry the best of medical insurance so that I have to pay a claim out of my pocket. The Justices need to look at the Law they are going to dissect very closely. A rushed decision will cause the citizens of this country more harm than any good.
heathcare and education are rights, and should be free.
Clearly a Republican. Like it's a God given right!!
As soon as all of you get hammered with double premium increases because of Obamacare; or loose your doctor because of Obamacare;or find out your on a death panel you'll want anyone in favor of Obamacare off the court.
That's just drivel. But you probably feel better now, don't you!
Couldn't care less. Of course Kagan should go, she's a commie. It doesn't matter a wink which way the court goes. The people will not like what happens, now Climb back in your hole
We need to continue pressuring the govt to stop meddling in health care. There is NO constitutional authority for the Federal govt to be involved in any way with healthcare decisions or costs.
If this totalitarian measure is allowed to stand it will be time for either a revolution, to dissolve the union, or to have a secession of states that wish to still follow the principles of our Constitution.
We've had enough of this marxist socialism and oppressive govt.
Oh, please, the health care reform legislation came directly out of the Republican playbook.
You don't even know who Marx was or what socialism is anyway, do you?
We already pay for other people's healthcare through our taxes, increased premiums, medicare taxes. The "mandate" makes the people who are relying on someone else paying for their visit to emergency rooms, pay for their own healthcare. It would be different if the person truly can't afford it, then yes society should help out, but many can afford it and don't purchase insurance. Now they must, I think that's fair.
Under the law, people that can't afford the insurance are subsidized by the government to purchase insurance.
I'm not a Republican- over the past 30 years, Republicans have been socialist light to the full blown marxist Democrats
And yes I know a lot about marxism and socialism. I have a degree in history and have fought against marxism for over 50 years including serving my country in the military
there is no downside to giving DC the power to tell us to buy a product or service!!!!
They call me in the middle of the night. Right outside my window.
What? Explain what the "upside" is then please...
I love all of your teapublican idiots on this board. There isn't ONE of you here right now that will not require medical attention now or as you age, yet you sit on here and spew the words and partisan rhetoric fed you be Rush, Rupert, and the Koch brothers and their ilk. Guess what, they can afford the best money can buy and the only other reason they're against it and spending so much money to kill it is because they don't want to pay their employees any benefits.
Wake up people - we need health care reform and we need it now. Is the present form of this bill the best - absolutely not, but we don't need to kill it, we need to improve it.
Stop arguing against your own self interest because whether you believe it or not - the insurance companies are not even remotely your friend or have your best interest at heart. They have massive profits as their one and only goal and to keep feeding those profits, year after year, they are raising rates you pay, lessening the benefits they pay, and maximizing the copay you fork over until they can successfully boot you out when they deem you're no longer profitable.
And you are an idiot to believe the Demorats and the godles liberals, the socialist, leftist, progressive marxist leaning Obumbo administration and "government" care.
Huey, the difference is we're willing to pay for ours, the objection is having to pay for us and everyone else...
@some - you absolutely have no idea what those words you just vomited out mean. Thanks for proving my point about aping what you hear on Fox, Rush, and the Koch brother funded tea party
If you strip away certain parts of bill you also strip away affordability. We need to start over from scratch. Start with common ground and build from there.
@Mr - that is the part you're aren't getting! You will NOT be able to afford it in is present state and going forward. Your premiums will continue to rise at ridiculous rates, you will have to pay vast amounts more each year in deductibles and maximum out of pocket expenses, and eventually, once you're claims outpace your premiums (the dreaded maximum lifetime benefit amount) you will be kicked off their plan and not be able to find another plan given your state of health. Think into the future instead of your present self - you are not going to be in your current situation for the rest of your life.
I am arguing for my self interest. I don't believe in doctors or the healthcare system. I'm a senior citizen who practices natureopathic health.
I carry a living will that stipulates that no life extending care be tendered to me in the event I'm unable to communicate that to medical personnel.
I don't want anything to do with your healthcare system yet I've had to pay into Medicare since they began taking it out of my pay in 1966.
If Obuma is gets a second term the United States is through! He isn't a leader and he is a disgrace to the office of the President. Leader of the free world, MY ASS!!!!
You are a disgrace. You are one of the stupid, unconscious idiots that voted republicans into office in the first place...where they totally and completely destroyed the USA from 1994-2008. A country as big as the USA is not ruined in 3 years. No meat head. That takes years and years. The republicans were in control of both houses of Congress and the US presidency from 1994-2008. The republicans created the Great Recession. There are many many more of us that want to see President Obama re-elected. We are too intelligent to fall for the stupid, low IQ republican rhetoric and lies that you have obviously fallen for. Typically, people like you believe literally in mythology like Xtianity...which is pure mythos and has no historical validity at all.
Its a disgrace that you have the same first name as I do. Time to change my name!!!
Robert-you are ignorant
the Senate was controlled by the Democrats in 2000, and 2007-2008
Our debt was created out of nearly 100 years of leftist socialist policies
The health care confiscation law is exaclty what liberals love. Liberals are not happy unless every dime someone else has is in theirs to tax, confiscate, and spend on themselves. They talk about "caring", "compassion", and the "evil rich", while all they do is complain and do nothing to help the "poor" and "elderly" nor are the "tolerant" or "compassionate" themselves. I give to the poor now, those that actually work and do need help, and the elderly, those that are over 65 or 70 and need it. I like most conservatives do not need someone to steal, or confiscate others money to "assist me to assist others". I give now and get no tax deduction for the about 70% of it. Conservatives give without needing government telling us to, or forcing us to do so. Liberals on the other hand will tax you a dollar, give 20 cents to the "poor", keep 80 cents for themselves, tell the "poor" how they will take care of them, and then turn around and call the ones they stole the money from by taxing them the "evil rich".
Please enlighten me how you are going to pay for your health care as you get old and fragile? Unless you have several million dollars set aside, you're going to need the government plan to step in. So drop the ridiculous rhetoric like this doesn't impact you - because if it doesn't right now, it will absolutely impact you and your family in the future. Chances are your parents and other relatives are already using government programs to help defray the outrageous cost of health care. Pull your head out of your arse and start thinking about the big picture for a change.
Dear God,
Thanks for knowing who deserves your assistance and who does not. I am so glad we have someone such as yourself who knows who is lazy and does not deserve, and who is worthy. What a gift to society that we finally have the truth - that you can see all people, know their backgrounds and their struggles. That you can understand who had been abused and not. That you can deem worthy and not, and therefore portion out your blessings accordingly, as well as to instruct others. Your mind is made up, your heart is closed . . . and you are scared to death.
Well moron, believe it or not I have insurance. I help those that do not WITHOUT needing you self righteous bigots and hypocrites forcing me to buy insurance or help others. Why are you not helping others NOW? That is the question you liberal godless hypocrite.
@someone - If you are representative of the conservative god fearing right then I thank my lucky stars I am not even remotely like you or your ilk. You are nothing but a selfish, soulless, coward with a heart that is as black as night. I only wish I was there the day you can no longer afford health care on your own and you are forced to take assistance from somebody else. Luckily for you, there will probably be somebody with a soul on the other end and will extend the helping hand that clueless, uneducated, ignorant, and selfish conservatives never could.
I dont' know the judges but to me it seems that they will vote per the party that put them in office. I don't believe C.T. has ethics.
I'm still having trouble understanding why any man has the right to order me to buy something that I don't need or use just so I pay into a system so that illegals, who are defined as "undocumented" by this law and the lazy people who refused to work and collect welfare/UE (anyone who falls under the poverty level) will get free healthcare. The illegals already get free healthcare!
This issue is so disturbing. I hope it doesn't pass! I will not pay into this.
American "conservatives" are the worst sub humans on the planet. These low lifes have not even attained human status...spiritually speaking. There is no heart consciousness present, hence why republicans can so easily send other people to war and into harm's way without batting an eyelash. I would rather be dead and have never lived than be a republican they are so repulsive and psycho spiritually corrupt. There are 2 types of people in the USA. Those that have attained the consciousness of the heart...which manifests in one's life as empathy and compassion. Then there are those who have no heart like republicans and they completely lack empathy and compassion. These are the types that live from their heads. Why? They have shut themselves out from their own hearts. This explains why republicans hate the Health Care law, which will help millions and millions of Americans. This explains why republicans sent our children to war and why they dont even bat an eyelash even with 1,000,000 dead. Republicans are heartless and soulless and it is a fine thing indeed to see them polling only 11%. Americans need to rid themselves of the evil menace and ignorance known as republicanism.
How's that Afghan "surge" working for you Robert? Obama sent the troops, now there are monthly records set for casualties, and they're not small records either son.
How is that Tea Party HD Network working for you dipsheat.
Typical liberal hypocrite is what Robert is. They will kill babies but think national defense and killing those that want to kill us is wrong. As I said, they are hypocrites of the worst order, godless, and just stupid apparently. Talk about spiritually dead, that is Robert and his ilk.
Hey Robert, how many repub presidents have gotten us in war versus a democrap?
WWI - Wilson
WW2 - FDR
Vietname - JFK/Johnson
Panama/Gulf War - Bush43
What's the matter LT, doesn't fit your illusions of the CIC?
Robert
In the 19th century, the great French libertarian philosopher Frederic Bastiat who influenced many Americans nailed liberals like yourself in his book, the Law
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”
Hey... my vote cancels your vote.
I'll bet there are some self righteous sobs on here right now that resent that remark. hahahaha
You proved your own post ltcommanidiot.
Do you ever feel foolish?
Fro Christ's sake, what in the hell does it take to get through people's thick, and I mean THICK heads? Our so called "leaders" ARE Crooks ................. thieves ............and liars, to the very last man and woman, BOTH, sides of the aisle. There are no PARTIES, there are just a group of people whose sole mission is to lie, cheat, and steal from us for their rich friends and themselves and the get themselves reelected. And we frigging PAY THEM TO DO IT TO US. How stupid can we really be? If we don't pull our heads out of our a$$e$ soon, there will BE NO United States and we'll have no one to blame but our own dumb a$$e$.
The Supreme court is such BS anymore. When you have "judges" such as Scalia talking about how waterboarding and other forms of torture are OK, appointing presidents by stopping vote counts and delcaring that corporations are people . . . what a joke.
The written word is a beautiful thing, but you have to actually remember it and understand it. In the article above, you missed the reality.
In Kagan's confirmation hearing, she "said in her confirmation testimony that she had attended at least one meeting where pending litigation against the health law might have been discussed, but "none where any substantive discussion of the litigation occurred."
This means what it says and that she is not part of any decisions and not tied to the mandatory clause. the remarks were made in he confirmation hearing and she was confirmed including them their impact.
On Thomas, his wife's monetary compensation is part of his joint financial picture. Since it is enhanced by the very people who are bringing the case, he is ethically encouraged to recuse.
Financially, both Thomas and Scalia are shown to be enhanced, and Alito is certainly likely to have the same ethical problems.
The crux of the issue is that those who are ethically challenged will neither abide by nor understand the ethics.
A conflict of interest is a conflict of interest my friend, no matter how you want to spin it. Having been in law enforcement for over twenty years I know EXACTLY what is proper and what is not. At least five of my friends are judges and, even at parties, you don't discuss pending cases even in the same room if you're on the other side of it and the stereo is blasting and you certainly don't go to meetings, rallies, or otherwise where a case that could even possibly ever come before you is being discussed, remember the blindfold thing?
why should only the 1% get healthcare?
Mitch, assuming -- and it's a big assumption on my part -- that you know what 1% mean, explain why the union healthcare plans are exempt from the "cadillac" plans tax until 2018? Could it be because they are in excess of the "1%" healthcare plans. You betcha, but don't let that stop your little rant.
Why should they have anything I don't have?
I want to force the poor to pay taxes but it's unconstitutional for them to force me to buy a basic healthcare policy.
Well then you are an idiot. Forcing someone to do or buy anything is dictatorial, idiotic, unnecessary and downright stupid, but liberals do it all the time.
I recommend you not file your income taxes this year or next.
force me to buy a basic healthcare policy. Your words.
You are an idiot Ltcommandumbo. Try getting job and paying your own way at least, you freeloading scum sucking parasitic leech on society.
Think of it as a tax if it makes you feel better. It's really a moot arguing about since the Supreme Court is getting ready to vote on it.
Name calling is against the code of ethics. Besides it makes you look like you are losing the argument and Mommy ain't gonna save you.
So, don't feel like you are being forced to pay your income taxes and SS, etc. Just quit filing period.
LT is partly right. If it were a tax, there would be nothing to stop it, so why isn't it simply a tax?
Because the fight for forcing citizens to buy a product under the commerce clause has more long term value if they win.
So LT, the answer for arguing is right there...