Bachmann calls for investigation into Kagan’s role crafting health care law defense

Comments (5)

  1. Submitted by Dennis Tester on 06/30/2011 - 08:24 pm.

    Clarence Thomas shouldn’t have to recuse himself because of the activities of his wife. She is a citizen in her own right and he should not be held liable for anything she says or does.

    Kagan, on the other hand, is being asked to recuse herself because of her activities, not her partner’s.

  2. Submitted by John Clawson on 07/01/2011 - 12:15 pm.

    Justice Thomas, however, accepting, as he does, gifts (say a $15,000 bust of Lincoln) and social amenities (say, from a right-wing political supporter in Arizona)might want to be a bit more circumspect about conflict-of-interest questions. Right-wing commentators know that they would never in a million years allow, say, Justice Hillary Clinton, to accept gifts or social amenities from left-wing/moderate supporters who may likely have issues before he Court. Republican commentary about whose hands are soiled and in what way should be takem with a large grain of salt. Grifting for gifts and bennies–keeping a less-than-acute watchout for COF insuues–are more a human dynamic/dilemma than they are a partisan one. I probably agree with Mr. Tester about Mrs. Thomas’ activites. Mr. Justice Thomas’ activites however are dangerous and indefensible regardless of partisan background.

  3. Submitted by will lynott on 07/01/2011 - 10:31 pm.

    Perhaps Bachmann will get her investigation–right after congress gets through investigating Democrats for un-American proclivities.

    God, she’s an embarrassment.

  4. Submitted by Bill Coleman on 07/05/2011 - 08:47 am.

    Kagan has already recused herself from some cases where she played an active part through her previous post in the administration. The sad thing about this story is that the republicans are stirring the pot, creating a sense of scandal where none exists. If and when these cases reach the Supreme Court, and when Justice Kagan announced her decision on whether she can participate or not, that is when this issue will be ripe for discussion.

    On the other hand, there are/have been questions whether Justice Thomas has/has had financial conflicts of interest due to the employment status of his wife. A husband and wife are a legal entity so when she receives compensation from an interested party, it seems that he would be too. Where that might not be a big deal in the Congress with so many members sharing decision-making, the conflict rises to a higher level with only 9 justices.

  5. Submitted by Rachel Kahler on 07/05/2011 - 01:11 pm.

    Spot on, Bill @#4.

Leave a Reply