As Twitchy reported earlier, Chief Justice John Roberts has delivered a "thanks, but no thanks" reply to Democrat Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse and Dick Durbin's request for a meeting to discuss Justice Samuel Alito flying a "MAGA battle flag" over his beach house last summer. This is the same MAGA battle flag that flew over San Francisco City Hall for decades before it was quietly taken down Saturday.
Democrats are desperate that Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas recuse themselves from any cases involving January 6, seeing as they're both insurrectionist sympathizers. Rep. Jamie Raskin, who you think would have embarrassed himself enough on the January 6 select committee, has an op-ed in the New York Times Wednesday explaining that recusal is not a "friendly suggestion." He argues that the Department of Justice can force Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves.
The NYT isn’t going to let this go. Today an op-ed by Jamie Raskin arguing that the other justices must “require” Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves:
— Steve McGuire (@sfmcguire79) May 30, 2024
“This recusal statute, if triggered, is not a friendly suggestion. It is Congress’s command, binding on the justices, just as… pic.twitter.com/dRicRJJlot
“This recusal statute, if triggered, is not a friendly suggestion. It is Congress’s command, binding on the justices, just as the due process clause is. The Supreme Court cannot disregard this law just because it directly affects one or two of its justices. Ignoring it would trespass on the constitutional separation of powers because the justices would essentially be saying that they have the power to override a congressional command.”
President Joe Biden was bragging again about disregarding the Supreme Court's ruling on student loan forgiveness just yesterday in Philadelphia. Why isn't Raskin flipping out over the constitutional separation of powers there?
Recommended
The Hill reports:
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that the Department of Justice could force the recusals of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in cases the court is facing related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.
“Everyone assumes that nothing can be done about the recusal situation because the highest court in the land has the lowest ethical standards — no binding ethics code or process outside of personal reflection,” the Maryland Democrat said in an opinion piece in The New York Times published Wednesday. “Each justice decides for him- or herself whether he or she can be impartial.”
…
“The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion: the Constitution of the United States, specifically the due process clause, and the federal statute mandating judicial disqualification for questionable impartiality, 28 U.S.C. Section 455,” Raskin said.
Raskin needs to let this go.
The word "sedition" gets thrown around a lot, mostly by people who turn right around and say shit like this. https://t.co/l7tWdo4fBc
— jimtreacher.substack.com (@jtLOL) May 30, 2024
Raskin is a pathetic blowhard. Alito already told him to get lost.
— JWF (@JammieWF) May 30, 2024
No, they legally can’t. @RepRaskin needs to shut up and learn Separation of Powers. Also, where was he when Kagan ruled on Obamacare cases? She helped draft the legislation. THAT’S a conflict of interest. Guess it’s (D)ifferent when they do far worse.
— Zanshi 惨死 (D - Jar Kitteh) (@zanshi1) May 30, 2024
He's not arguing. He's lying. DOJ is an executive branch agency and therefore has no such authority
— Physics Geek (@physicsgeek) May 30, 2024
This is so obviously a ploy to foment more dissatisfaction with the Court. Anyone who understands the separation of powers is pointing and laughing at Raskin, but the dummies will respond as this filters down from the NYT.
— Dennis, Actual Antifascist (@spongeworthy2) May 30, 2024
Democrats don't control the Supreme Court, and it has driven them insane.
I have a question for Raskin...
— DBG8492 (@dbg8492) May 30, 2024
If Alito and Thomas tell Congress to pound sand regardless of what the rest of the bench says or feels, who would enforce this law and what would that look like?
Trump had to go because he "attacked our institutions." And now this. 🙄
— Floyd Jones 🌸 (@ojspal) May 30, 2024
We have separations of power for a reason little tyrant.
— Floridian 🇺🇸 FA/FO (@RandomFLDude) May 30, 2024
Sounds insurrectiony
— Jim Muessig (@JimMuessig) May 30, 2024
Does Raskin want Alito and Thomas handcuffed and frog-marched out of the Supreme Court?
I'm not one to toss political broad brushes but it's clear the democrats in congress don't understand separation of powers.
— DangerZone (@HighwayToTheDZ) May 30, 2024
Ummm, has the Election Denier never heard of separation of powers?
— Usually Right (@normouspenis) May 30, 2024
That's right, he tried to stop the certification of Donald Trump's election:
— This Here Snakeskin Jacket (@SFlipp) May 30, 2024
Someone needs to watch some Schoolhouse Rock
— Jim Keats (@jim_keats) May 30, 2024
The Supreme Court has already made itself perfectly clear, and no amount of whining from Congress is going to change that.
***
Join the conversation as a VIP Member