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 ::
:: Tuesday, October 14, 2003 ::
Recusal?
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 [+] ::
...
:: Wednesday, October 01, 2003 ::
Oops -- the President has recognized that "fourth branch" of the federal government:
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 [+] ::
...
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 [+] ::
...
