Why doesn't Scalia recuse himself from gay issues before the Court?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He has publicly proclaimed his vitriol and utter distaste for gays and lesbians. Why is he allowed to make decisions over gay and lesbian rights when we already know what his decision would be?
Are you pretending to not know what the decisions of (in)Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan would be?
It's not just his assessment. It's his complete inability to even listen to what the pro-gay side wants to say and already making up his mind before they even get a chance to make a case.
I agree, everyone already knows what Scalia's decision is going to be on any case that involves civil rights for gays. When a justice has their mind made up before a case even exists or a single argument has been made, they are biased beyond hope and should recuse themselves from the case. The fact that he won't does not mean that he shouldn't.
Simply because you disagree with his assessment does not require him to recuse himself. The other eight will out weigh him if he is out of line. That's why there are multiple people on there, not just one.
Odd that the liberals don't suggest that Justice Sotomayor should recuse herself in cases that deal with Hispanics given her statement of "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life", prior to her nomination.
Liberals only complain about bias when it has conservative roots.
And they absolutely despise Justice Thomas.
Can't they be charged with a hate crime for hating a black man so much?
I can only assume that Justice Ginsberg is impartial since she doesn't openly crow about her decisions or how she feels about certain people. She is very lady-like and acts professionally; she's not the craven lunatic monster that Scalia is. At least, she will ask questions unlike Scalia's sidekick (Uncle Thomas).
Deflection won't work. Whether or not she is "ladylike" is irrelevant. She's on record as having made the gov't case for them when the gov't attorney floundered. One of the conservative judges asked him a question, he started hemming and hawing, and she went and answered it for him. Clear evidence of bias.
He'd be quite a nasty "bear man"- wouldn't he? Hair up and down his back and crack. Fat man-belly.
I'm never going to get an erection ever again. Thanks.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
