Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
You are misrepresenting what NOM said.
1. NOM didn't say the justices HAVE TO recuse themselves; they are saying they should. Big difference. Are you saying that NOM doesn't have the right to express themselves? Recusal because a judge has already formed their opinion prior to hearing both sides is solid ground for requesting recusal.
And there are many cases of federal judges recusing themselves. So NOM isn't out of bounds in making that request.
Of course, the SCOTUS judges won't recuse on this issue. But NOM has every right to make the case.
Making a case for judicial recusal isn't ignorance of the law; at least the way you frame the argument in this thread.
|
Whirly, I am just saying that it does their cause no good to ask in the first place, and, in my opinion,shows an ignorance of how our Government works. That would be like asking Scalia to recuse himself from a 2d Amendment argument because he owns a shotgun.
It is no different when the ultra liberal left makes the same argument from the other end of the political spectrum.
In the next few months, it will become clear to everybody why taking control of the Senate was so important in the last two years of President Obama's term. Just amagine what type of liberal shithead or Democrat lackey he would send up if a vacancy comes.
Of course, we would be hoping that the Republican Controled Senate will have the guts to say no to The President. The question should be......"how do you know that this nominee is not suitable to sit on SCOTUS? Simple. Obama thinks they are".
National Organization for Marriage Needs To Read The Constitution
