The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: CG6468 on July 09, 2011, 03:22:27 PM
-
udiciary Committee Launches Probe of Kagan’s Involvement in Obamacare
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
By Terence P. Jeffrey
[Editor’s note: As originally posted, this story used the word “investigation†in three places to describe what the House Judiciary Committee was initiating with Chairman Lamar Smith’s letter to the attorney general which is cited in this report. In those three places, the word “investigation†has been changed to “inquiry.†The committee requested a correction of the story, saying Smith’s letter asking for four categories of documents from the Justice Department as well as “witness interviews†is a “request for additional information†and not the beginning of a “formal investigation.†“The Committee has contacted the Justice Department for additional information, but we have not launched a formal investigation at this time,†a Judiciary Committee aide told CNSNews.com in an emailed statement. To see a follow-up story click here.]
(CNSNews.com) - The House Judiciary Committee is launching an inquiry to probe the involvement that Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan had in “health care legislation or litigation†when she was serving as President Barack Obama’s solicitor general and was responsible for defending the administration’s position in federal court cases.
The inquiry will look at whether Kagan is required by law to recuse herself from judging cases challenging President Obama’s health-care law and whether her answers to questions posed by the Senate Judiciary Committee during her confirmation process were accurate.
LINK: No bias, though (http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/judiciary-committee-launches-probe-kagan)
-
I have a feeling that nothing of substance will come out of this. She is unlikely to recuse herself regardless of the Judiciary Committee finds.
-
I have a feeling that nothing of substance will come out of this. She is unlikely to recuse herself regardless of the Judiciary Committee finds.
No conflict of interest, her interests, DUmmie interests and Obamas' interests are all the same, ergo, no conflict.
-
I have a feeling that nothing of substance will come out of this. She is unlikely to recuse herself regardless of the Judiciary Committee finds.
HI,
She was put in the job for the reason of supporting Obamacare, the only way she will not do so is if she is forced not to. These folks have already proven they have no regard for the law or constitution, this should be a surprise to no one.
regards,
5412
-
Would a hen chase a June bug?
Of course Kagan is going all out for this. She is a Солдат, a soldier for the glorious revolution.
She hates America as much as any of the rest of the current regime.
-
If the Judiciary Committee finds that she is required to recuse, and she doesn't, would that be an impeachable offense? And would they wait til after 0bama's gone to remove her so President Cain (or Palin, Bachmann, etc) can name the replacement?
-
If the Judiciary Committee finds that she is required to recuse, and she doesn't, would that be an impeachable offense? And would they wait til after 0bama's gone to remove her so President Cain (or Palin, Bachmann, etc) can name the replacement?
I may be wrong, but I don't think that the Judiciary Committee has the authority to require her to recuse herself. I think they can only recommend. But if I am wrong, then it might be an impeachable offense if she refuses to. But I doubt the current Senate would actually act on any such impeachment proceeding brought by the house.
-
I may be wrong, but I don't think that the Judiciary Committee has the authority to require her to recuse herself. I think they can only recommend. But if I am wrong, then it might be an impeachable offense if she refuses to. But I doubt the current Senate would actually act on any such impeachment proceeding brought by the house.
The article mentioned a federal law requires recusal, so I would think a strongly worded letter to the effects of "Hey dummy, either you sit out or we start impeachment proceedings for breaking this law." may have some effect. I know the current Senate wouldn't do squat, but after the 2012 election? Could be a different kettle of fish.
-
sigh.... That's what I get for not reading the article carefully enough. Thanks for the clarification docstew.