| |||||
:: welcome to NINOMANIA:: A constitutional law blog by Scalia/Thomas fan David M. Wagner, M.A., J.D., Research Fellow, National Legal Foundation, and Teacher, Veritas Preparatory Academy. Opinions expressed here are those of the author and do not reflect those of the NLF or Veritas. :: bloghome | E-mail me :: | |||||
"Scalialicious!" -- Eve Tushnet "Frankfurter was born too soon for the Web, but I'm sure that, had it been possible, there would have been the equivalent of Ninomania for Frankfurter." -- Mark Tushnet (I agree, and commented here.) "The preeminent Scalia blog" -- Underneath Their Robes Site Feed Also please visit my opera blog, Box Five! Bloglinks: Above the Law, by David Lat Balkinization CrimLaw Duncan's Con Law Course Blog Eve Tushnet Eye of Polyphemus, by Jamie Jeffords How Appealing Hugh Hewitt Justice Thomas Appreciation Page Legal Theory Blog Lex Communis Opinio Juris Overlawyered.com Paper Chase (from JURIST) Point of Law (Manhattan Inst.) Professor Bainbridge Public Discourse Redeeming Law, by Prof. Mike Schutt SCOTUS Blog Volokh Conspiracy WSJ Law Blog Other fine sites: Alexander Hamilton Inst. for Study of Western Civilization Ave Maria School of Law Center for Thomas More Studies Family Defense Center The Federalist Society The Founders' Constitution George Mason University School of Law Immigration and Refugee Appellate Center Judged: Law Firm News & Intelligence JURIST Law Prose (Bryan Garner) Liberty Library of Constitutional Classics National Lawyers Association (alternative to ABA) Supreme Court decisions The Weekly Standard Something I wrote about marriage ![]()
|
:: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 ::
It's unclear from this story whether Justice Scalia has recused himself from any participation in the Pledge case, or whether he merely did not take part in considering the cert petition. I can't imagine a valid reason from him to recuse himself. Maybe he's a Knight of Columbus; it was the Knights who successfully campaigned back in the Ike era to get "under God" added to the Pledge. There's a rough analogy there to Justice Thomas recusing himself in the VMI case because his son was a student at the Citadel. Both recusals are or would be, in my view, unnecessary. C'mon, where's that old Marbury v. Madison spirit? You can be a player in the facts of the case -- and your brother too -- and still not have to recuse!! For Marshall, recusal was unnecessary unless you had a financial interest in the case (Hunter's Lessee). Anything short of that -- you're there! :: David M. Wagner 2:40 PM [+] :: ... But I want to tell you something -- leaks of classified information are a bad thing. And we've had them -- there's too much leaking in Washington. That's just the way it is. And we've had leaks out of the administrative branch, had leaks out of the legislative branch, and out of the executive branch and the legislative branch.... Justice Sutherland's nasty piece of work in Humphrey's Executor continues to turn our leaders into constitutional mutants. :: David M. Wagner 4:07 PM [+] :: ... |
||||
![]() |