Not A Good Sign – WE Must Apply More Pressure!

[Pistarkle]

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts announced that Justice Clarence Thomas will not need to recuse himself from deliberating on the constitutionality of the Affordable Health Care Act affecting 15 MILLION uninsured Americans concluding that Justice Thomas’ deliberations will be fair. Chief Justice Roberts, also, moved up hearings on the Act from the Fall, 2012 to March, 2012.

NEITHER of the above announcements is a good sign for the following reasons:

1. Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose a financial interest involving the conservative lobbyist earnings of his wife who is a self-acclaimed spokesperson for the Tea Party, and who has, publicly, stated that her “focus is to stop the Obama agenda”.

2. The very same evening of Chief Justice Roberts’ initial announcement that the Supreme Court would address the Affordable Health Care Act in the Fall, 2012, Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas AND Conservative Justice Anthony Scalia appeared as KEYNOTE SPEAKERS at a fundraising dinner sponsored by The Federalist Society (a Right Wing legal group that wants to kill the Affordable Health Care Act).

3. The Code of Conduct for United States Judges, surprisingly, DOES NOT APPLY TO SUPREME COURT JUSTICES, but it’s an eye opener. Canon 2A of the Code states that “a judge must avoid all impropriety and APPEARANCE of impropriety. This prohibition applies to professional AND personal conduct.” Canon 2B of the Code states that “a judge should avoid lending the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge OR OTHERS.

4. The Affordable Health Care Act will be ruled upon by the same Conservative Supreme Court Justices who sanctified Citizens United. That decision opened the floodgates for corporate entities to ANONYMOUSLY buy elections via super PACs.

5. What’s the rush all of a sudden?

Time is running out. WE have got to apply more pressure! Continue to, RESPECTFULLY, ask Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts to request that Justice Thomas AND Justice Scalia recuse themselves from participating in the Affordable Health Care Act at www.wupremecourt.gov/contract/contactus.aspzx.

Spread the word!

[Kurmudgeon]

1. Agreed, not a good thing at all.

[Scuba]

2. No surprise, just shows how corrupt Roberts is...

... it's going to take a whole bunch of public outrage to have any effect on those fuckers.

[fasttense]

3. Thomas Recuse himself? Never in a million years, he can make big bucks selling his vote.

Thomas has clearly demonstrated an ability to make lots of money out of his votes. The Supremes deserve NO respect. They are a farce, a charade. They are corrupt and merely pretend to evaluate the law.

And most of America believes the same.

[Lionessa]

4. Okay, this is wrong, but perhaps this is a reasonable thread to ask a related question.

Taking a step back, two questions.

1. Is the issue relating solely to the mandate? Which is what I currently think I understand, correct me if I'm wrong.

2. If Thomas or any or all determine that being alive isn't a reasonable reason to be forced into buying a product or service, doesn't that help the push to a universal system?

I've been a critic of the insurance giveaway from the start, no question about it. However, I will say that many aspects already in place are showing signs of helping some, though not nearly all, and I doubt the public will be at all agreeable to the entire thing being repealed rather than a wiser a funding system, like Medicare. So perhaps at this point in time it's not such a bad idea to have them vote down the mandate.

Please, I am way open to being re-educated here if I'm way off base. The insurance bill is so weighty, and the reviews of its pros and cons so disparate that I've never been able to really feel I've had a handle on it. I just know that as it stands, seems the big winners are insurance companies, and 26M still end up without health care.

[Romulox]

5. Wait. Do "we" want the SCOTUS to OK mandatory private insurance?

And what rule do "we" want them to enunciate, such that the US Congress can't force us to buy any product from any private corporation?