SC Justice Kagan recused herself because she participated in the original law's defense.
But now we have Clarence Thomas presiding over this case, even though his wife received tens of thousands of dollars as a Tea Party lobbyist to lobby against health care reform. Apparently Thomas has never heard of recusal from
judicial conflict of interest:
Quote:
Code of Conduct for United States Judges
Federal judges abide by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, a set of ethical principles and guidelines adopted by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The Code of Conduct provides guidance for judges on issues of judicial integrity and independence, judicial diligence and impartiality, permissible extra-judicial activities, and the avoidance of impropriety or even its appearance.
Judges may not hear cases in which they have either personal knowledge of the disputed facts, a personal bias concerning a party to the case, earlier involvement in the case as a lawyer, or a financial interest in any party or subject matter of the case.
|
Is there some ridiculous obscure case law that I'm unaware of?
Or is this yet another case of one standard for progressives, but a different standard for conservotards?
* and by "LAWYERGUYZ", I do not mean Jerome or Chief Justice yguy.