Recusal isn't a legal matter. It's an ethical one.
Your failure to present an ethical case here is our fault either. You’re calling on Thomas to recuse himself from a non-existent case. You haven’t even suggested a hypothetical charge or defendant. AOC planted a talking point in your ear and you guys bit.
The ethical case is his wife's belief in the things which led to people who attacked the Capitol and his involvement. I don't need to present the one which was presented before I even jumped in
So it's not reasonable to assume that a spouse has some influence on their other half? Especially since Justice Thomas has been described (by both political sides) as devoted and accommodating to his? If the tables were reversed, (back to my hypothetical which you still have not addressed) if it were a liberal justice with a spouse who was verbalizing such wild unsubstantiated things for the liberal side, would you defend them in the same manner or call for their recusal? I'm still waiting for you to answer that question. As for not being taken seriously, I've said time and again, it matters not who the justice is, if they appear to be bias, appear to be influenced, they should not be sitting on a case. for the second time, that last sentence is because you have no real answer for my questions, an attempt at insulting me in the hopes I'll get angry and come down to your level. Sorry, but that ain't gunna happen.
I don't know, but that's par for the course. He's been known to go years at a time without speaking up during court sessions.
Political opinions of a justice’s spouse are not grounds for recusal. Presumably all of the sitting justices who are married are in deeply devoted relationships with their soulmates. It’s also reasonable to assume that their spouses have some strong political opinions. So do justices. That does not disqualify them from judging cases based on their interpretation of the law.
Recusal is completely the choice of the justice who recuses themselves. So the "grounds" you mention don't actually exist beyond the public perception and pressure applied.
Right. Recusal is the choice of the justice. It is rare, and justices don‘t do it randomly for no reason. Sandra Day O’Conner routinely recused herself from telco cases. Breyer recused himself from some insurance cases. Both did so because of potential perceived financial conflicts of interest. Thomas once recused himself from a case involving Virginia Military Institute because he had a family member connected to the school. His son was a student there.
Thanks for acknowledging that there is no such things as "grounds for recusal" and that prescedent and political pressure are the factors
Thanks for acknowledging that you have no idea what you want Thomas to recuse himself from. You seem to think he should bow to “political pressure” to recuse himself from something, but you can’t figure out exactly what it is.
I gave my perspective earlier. You're the one obfuscating what recusal is aboutThanks for acknowledging that you have no idea what you want Thomas to recuse himself from. You seem to think he should bow to “political pressure” to recuse himself from something, but you can’t figure out exactly what it is.
If you think justices should recuse themselves from cases that involve political pressure, you’re going to be very disappointed when the Dobbs ruling comes down. Thomas is married to a woman. Probably a pro-life one at that.
No he doesn't. The fucked up mentality of the left in regard to his wife has nothing to do with his ability to decide a constitutional issue before the court. Maybe he'll consider it when Joe Biden excuses himself from the presidency because of his son, or when Nancy Pelosi resigns because of her husband getting rich on her official decisions as Speaker of the House.
It's called having a different opinion. You can disagree.
Nonsense. The court is independent.
Which is why every story on a court decision includes who appointed them.
so what's going on with him? was he sicker than suggested and taking longer to recover? laying low till people 'forget' about his wife's antics? been advised to stay in the shadows because of stuff that will come out about his wife and jan 6th, when a short note about him 'retiring' will be issued? is he back at work but there's been no mention in the news cycles?Has anyone even seen old boy since he got sicked up?
I'm old enough to remember when Biden "hiding in his basement" was the Right's news lean into for at least 3/4ths of a year.
guess they don't care about their token homeboy. sadz.
It really has nothing to do with Gini Thomas. There is no case coming before the court that has anything to do with her.
She was part of the group that put on the event that led to the attack on the Capitol.
More nonsense. She had nothing to do with the riot, has not been charged with any crime, is not facing a trial, and has nothing to do with anything coming before the court. Justice Thomas is not going to resign and there are no cases you can identify coming before him that would be a reason to recuse himself. Some big SCOTUS decisions are coming down over the next 60 days. Enjoy!
She was part of the group that put the event on. That event is literally being used by many on the defense.
She attended a rally. Was not at the riot and was not part of any group that organized the riot. You know this.
He should resign. He's too old.
He's younger than a few others in govt positions.
And again, you try to skip right past without ever addressing my question.
