Elena Kagan Recuses Self in 25 Cases as Supreme Court's Fall Session Begins

She represented BHO on his citizenship cases in the Supreme Court. Now she will have to recuse herself on his citizenship cases, since she was involved previously. I believe there are 4 cases against BHO in the Supreme Court...

There seems to be confusion about the role of the Supreme Court and its justices. Any political opinions about this branch of government are only pertinent when examining whether the justices vote as Constitutional fundamentalists or as interpreters. The choices of what cases will be heard are determined by the Chief Justice. Since our Constitution as originally written was fundamentally flawed by slavery, and has required amendments, Justices are required to adapt the modern day questions to original intent, not political imperatives of the current party in power. This is our system. Embrace it. Use it. Stop whining.

I believe Patrick Leahy is WAY out of bounds asking for a "replacement" justice. The Democrats knew, or should have known, the baggage this nominee, now justice, brought with her, and used that fact in determining if she was in fact the best for the job. Now that many of their favorite proposals will be heard by a more conservative court, they are upset. You made the bed fellows...now sleep in it.

No one should be in any political position for life especially the US Supreme Court

I guess the politics of the "justice" system are already showing.

How did I do that in my last post, some errors in my sentences! Perhaps by trying to type faster than my thought process, so let me correct it. The very first sentence of this article is very ironic to me. Let me explain why by quoting that sentence. "The Supreme Court gavels in its fall session Monday, but the August panel's newest justice will be its least involved member" I am just layman when it comes to affairs about law and justices, but for many years now, I have seen Justice Clarence Thomas to be the most least involved that I might call him a "sitting duck" justice that he always votes in lockstep with justice Anthony Scalia and he will continue to be so in the future. So, I will find Justice Elena Kagan to be very inspiring for the court and off the bat she will hit home run. And let be add further that her smiles is full of confidence that expresses that she is herself and no one else. We are going to see Star Justice and the most exciting one in years to come.

At the very least, she's doing something that the Conservatives would NEVER do... She's following proper law by recusing herself from these cases... unlike Scalia who goes hunting (and/or golfing) with a buddy that's party to a SCOTUS case, and removes all doubt which way he'll rule on the case...

The very first sentence of this article is very ironic to me. Let me explain why by quoting that sentence. "The Supreme Court gavels in it's fall session Monday, but the August panel's newest justice will it's least involved member" I am just layman when it comes to affair's about law and justices, but for many years now, I have seen Justice Clarence Thomas to be most least involved that I might call him a "sitting duck" justice that he always votes in lockstep with justice Anthony Scalia and he will continue to be so in the future. So, I will find Justice Elena Kagan to be very inspiring for the court and of the bat is will hit home run.

Look people she got the job on merit and her knowledge of law. She has done the right thing by taking her self off of those cases. So congratulate her on doing whats right. For the people who have issues with what she did, how would you like it if you could never get promoted because you did you job and knew too much. further more she will miss 25 cases out of the hundreds she will see in her lifetime. After hearing this I look forward to here tenure as justice I think she will make very informed and educated decisions which are qualties we need in a justice.

It seems to me that the problem with picking a retired justice to sit in on recused cases is that without a Senate confirmation, the constitutional requirements will not be fulfilled. A constitutional amendment would make the court more political than it is and open the possibility of setting up provisions for packing the court. I, personally, do not see a problem with the status quo.