Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Calista241

(5,586 posts)
18. A few times, though there are some obvious failures to recuse.
Tue Apr 27, 2021, 04:54 PM
Apr 2021

Clarence Thomas recused himself from United States v Virginia because his son attended VMI. The male only attendance policy at VMI was later struck down by the Court 7-1.

Scalia recused himself from Elk Grove Unified School District v Newdow. Scalia had disagreed with the 9th circuit's decision publicly in a speech. The Court later unanimously (8-0) overturned the 9th Circuit by claiming Newdow lacked standing.

Failures to recuse:
Both Alito and Breyer failed to recuse themselves for Feng v Komenda. Breyer owned $250k and Alito owned $50k worth of United Technologies stock, the company which acquired Rockwell Collins which was a party to the case.

Scalia did had 2 obvious conflicts which he failed to recuse for. Hamdan v Rumsfeld, and Cheney v District of Columbia. Judge Gilbert Merrit, on the 6th circuit, wrote that Scalia should have recused himself from Bush v Gore, since Scalia's sons worked with law firms that supported the Bush campaign, though not directly with the challenge in Bush v Gore. Gilbert's claims were fought by Republicans as Gilbert was highly regarded as a potential SCOTUS nominee by the Gore administration if the election had gone the other way.

Thomas did not recuse himself from ACA related cases even though his wife lobbied against the bill.

Good luck. Conservative justices are above the law, donchaknow. JudyM Apr 2021 #1
Above the law and beneath contempt RVN VET71 Apr 2021 #13
Our only hope may be public shaming, as Whitehouse seems to be making a move to do. More, please! JudyM Apr 2021 #15
True, but can you shame the shameless? RVN VET71 Apr 2021 #19
This message was self-deleted by its author JudyM Apr 2021 #2
Justice Quack Quack Scalia didn't have to recuse himself in his buddy's case, so why should she? catrose Apr 2021 #3
Both of them strict constructionists. In his case just... brush Apr 2021 #20
Then she can be impeached for whatever conflict of interest her actions represent. ancianita Apr 2021 #4
No she can't Polybius Apr 2021 #5
Only if Dems can make it a believable "high crimes and misdemeanors" violation Calista241 Apr 2021 #11
Grounds to impeach. Of course, it won't go anywhere. LiberalFighter Apr 2021 #6
Conservative judges refusing to recuse themselves from cases involving serious conflict of Martin68 Apr 2021 #7
Solution: Nominate 4 judges to expand SC to 13 instead of 9. Justice matters. Apr 2021 #8
I'd like to see the number 6 RVN VET71 Apr 2021 #14
And who paid off all of Kavanaugh's debts just before his confirmation? Midnight Writer Apr 2021 #9
Impeachment of a judge is a political action, not a legal action...no law needs to be broken pecosbob Apr 2021 #10
She is a pill. Grimelle Apr 2021 #12
I know Sotomayer has recused herself, has any "conservative" justice? Ever? Grins Apr 2021 #16
This is a list from 2016. former9thward Apr 2021 #17
A few times, though there are some obvious failures to recuse. Calista241 Apr 2021 #18
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Democrats Criticize Justi...»Reply #18