Alito refuses to recuse

Crepitus

Crepitus

Verified User

Alito’s Aggrieved Letter to Congress Tips His Hand in the Jan. 6 Cases​


And his excuse is down right ridiculous. It also proves that this little "ethics pledge" they all reluctantly signed on to last fall is just as useless as I said at the time.


In Alito’s telling, he not only won’t recuse but in fact can’t recuse from the insurrection cases. Why? Because, he suggests, the nonbinding and entirely subjective ethics code to which the nine justices half-heartedly committed themselves this past fall requires that they remain on cases when they personally decide there’s no legitimate reason to recuse. Alito therefore asserts an “obligation” to hear the Trump-related cases.

So the ethics code is, we discover, mandatory, but only in the sense that it converts a justice’s hostility toward recusal into an affirmative duty not to recuse. (We trust that Alito, like the other Republican-appointed justices, will continue to disregard the ethics suggestions he dislikes.)
 
How is this a new rule, that a judge should not unreasonably refuse himself?

Anyway, there is a reason in the Trump cases.
 
The Federalist Society has spent a lot of time and money picking and grooming judges who are young and will rule in the way they want for generations. The Trumpian Christian supremacists on the court have been provided new younger comrades. Recusal is not allowed. They have specific and directed rulings to make.
 
Crepitus said:

Alito’s Aggrieved Letter to Congress Tips His Hand in the Jan. 6 Cases​


And his excuse is down right ridiculous. It also proves that this little "ethics pledge" they all reluctantly signed on to last fall is just as useless as I said at the time.


In Alito’s telling, he not only won’t recuse but in fact can’t recuse from the insurrection cases. Why? Because, he suggests, the nonbinding and entirely subjective ethics code to which the nine justices half-heartedly committed themselves this past fall requires that they remain on cases when they personally decide there’s no legitimate reason to recuse. Alito therefore asserts an “obligation” to hear the Trump-related yes. ancases.

So the ethics code is, we discover, mandatory, but only in the sense that it converts a justice’s hostility toward recusal into an affirmative duty not to recuse. (We trust that Alito, like the other Republican-appointed justices, will continue to disregard the ethics suggestions he dislikes.)
Click to expand...
yes. he cannot deny the people his service without good reason.
 
Crepitus said:

Alito’s Aggrieved Letter to Congress Tips His Hand in the Jan. 6 Cases​


And his excuse is down right ridiculous. It also proves that this little "ethics pledge" they all reluctantly signed on to last fall is just as useless as I said at the time.


In Alito’s telling, he not only won’t recuse but in fact can’t recuse from the insurrection cases. Why? Because, he suggests, the nonbinding and entirely subjective ethics code to which the nine justices half-heartedly committed themselves this past fall requires that they remain on cases when they personally decide there’s no legitimate reason to recuse. Alito therefore asserts an “obligation” to hear the Trump-related cases.

So the ethics code is, we discover, mandatory, but only in the sense that it converts a justice’s hostility toward recusal into an affirmative duty not to recuse. (We trust that Alito, like the other Republican-appointed justices, will continue to disregard the ethics suggestions he dislikes.)
Click to expand...
Arent all ethics a matter of personal choice? If you have a problem with Alito's ethical choice file a complaint.
 
Nordberg said:
The Federalist Society has spent a lot of time and money picking and grooming judges who are young and will rule in the way they want for generations. The Trumpian Christian supremacists on the court have been provided new younger comrades. Recusal is not allowed. They have specific and directed rulings to make.
Click to expand...
Waaaaaaaa waaaaaaaa. Maybe your diaper is wet too
 
Yakuda said:
Arent all ethics a matter of personal choice? If you have a problem with Alito's ethical choice file a complaint.
Click to expand...
That is the weakest, laziest, most half assed excuse I've seen in this thread, and there are a shitload of bad excuses here.
 
The Trumpys and far righty judges have destroyed the image of the Supreme Court. It was the most respected branch of government until the Repubs created a way to own it. This is comparable to the Republicans weaponizing gerrymandering. It existed in small form for a century. Now the Repubs can win elections with fewer voters.
 
Yakuda said:
Arent all ethics a matter of personal choice? If you have a problem with Alito's ethical choice file a complaint.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Israel's genocide of Arab Semites who never attacked Israel is a simple matter of personal choice. Anyone with a problem should hold war crimes tribunals.
 
IBDaMann said:
Exactly. Israel's genocide of Arab Semites who never attacked Israel is a simple matter of personal choice. Anyone with a problem should hold war crimes tribunals.
Click to expand...
Maybe you can answer what your hysterical little friends can't how many "zionists" did Hamas kill on Oct 7?
 
Yakuda said:
Maybe you can answer what your hysterical little friends can't how many "zionists" did Hamas kill on Oct 7?
Click to expand...
Hamas killed zero people on October 7th. Hamas is nothing more than a political party with no military and no money. Hamas couldn't attack anyone.

Al Qassam, however, did attack Israel as Iran's well-funded proxy, in a heinous act of mass murder. The 100+ perpetrators should definitely be brought to justice. The Gazan civilian noncombatants who never attacked Israel should not be slaughtered by the tens of thousands just because Israel wishes to effect the 2nd Nakba and because Israel considers being Arab to be sufficient to warrant a death sentence.
 
A large part of the Supreme Court is to preserve the checks and balances. Since Trump, that function has been destroyed. They are slanted bigly and answer to Trump and the far right. They do not care about the image of the court. Some righty judges are taking gifts by the truckload. They are destroying the court in respect and function.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top