A National Law Journal article has spotlighted Justice at Stake’s recommendation that Justices Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan should strongly consider giving a public explanation of their reasons for not recusing from the federal health care case before the Supreme Court.
Veteran Supreme Court observer Tony Mauro wrote the article, headlined “On health care, should Kagan and Thomas explain decision not to recuse?” Most of the subscription-only article was available publicly through Law.com’s Supreme Court Insider web site. The article began:
“Amid calls for the recusal of Supreme Court justices Elena Kagan and Clarence Thomas in the upcoming health care cases, an influential organization is making an alternate suggestion: the justices should explain their decisions not to recuse.”
The article gave some history to the recently mounting calls for recusal, then quoted excerpts from this week’s JAS statement, including the following:
“Given the importance of the health care case to the lives of many Americans, and the rare public education opportunities that such high-profile cases offer, we believe written explanations by justices Kagan and Thomas offer the best available avenue for assuring the public that the Supreme Court will be fair and impartial — adhering to the law, the Constitution and relevant Supreme Court precedent.”
To learn more about the recusal demands by political groups and individuals — but not by parties to the case, to date — see Gavel Grab.