2fer, Words: 1) "Recuse" for SHITLER to learn. 2) "Choice" for wingnuts in general.

[UTUSN]

1) So SHITLER has been vomiting about getting the GINSBURG replacement right away “because judges will be needed” for Election court cases. For argument’s sake let’s say the replacement is done before the Election. If there was ever a situation calling for *RECUSAL* this would seem to be prime. Not that norms, legal or otherwise, matter with him. Remember Jeff Beauregard SESSIONS, who got his early and steadfast loyalty repaid with torrid verbal, humiliating abuse when he recused himself?


2) As for the Medieval “Catholic” who is bruited to be the current front runner, her brand of rabid “Catholicism” (think: Inquisition) highlights that fanaticism (brainwashing) is the same under whatever brand Religion name. Wingnuts with the “abortion” obsession don’t care what SHITLER says or does so long as he (actually, Senator TURTLE and the Federalists) crams the judicial system with Medieval “religious” fanatics.

For them it’s all about *CHOICE*. Not Choice for everybody, but rather everybody living by the Wingnuts’ Choice. That is, “religious” wingnuts believe that THEIR choice to live by their fanaticism is their right, but not only their right but what everybody else has to live by.

[RockRaven]

1. SCOTUS Justices are not bound by any law or guideline to recuse. It is 100% discretionary.

And the main criteria for Trump's pick will be their willingness to be blatantly corrupt in their refusal to recuse.

The Sessions analogy does not apply because there *IS* a law about improper decisions to not recuse which affects the AG.

Look at Thomas and the cases where he should have recused but did not. They are legion. That is what will happen with Trump's nominee/new Justice.

[UTUSN]

2. I'm welcoming to learn stuff, so thanks. & yeah I've noticed the collusion of Justices and litigants

The analogies that pop into my mind are their own thing, quite separate from knowledge or expertise!1

[RockRaven]

3. It's a huge/glaring loophole, but it is not clear to me that a law can fix it, it might need

a constitutional amendment, which very very difficult even in the long term, never mind soon. (I'm neither a lawyer nor a constitutional scholar nor a historian; I only know what I've read/heard)