The recusal trap

Well, it's always something. If it isn't one thing, it's another. Who would have guessed — other than the legal eagles — that the provisions of Title 28 U.S. Code sec. 455 covering the recusal of judges, justices, and magistrate judges would provide such a compelling reason to sink the nomination of Harriet Miers to our Highest Court. Mr. Wohlstetter over at American Spectator tells us all about it. Or rather, at least enough to raise a very serious question regarding the nominee's suitability.
 
Funny, but you just don't know what you don't know. As the Wall Street Journal's "Best of the Web" would put it, that's why we have experts.
 
Dennis Sevakis   10 06 05

 

 

 
 

Well, it's always something. If it isn't one thing, it's another. Who would have guessed — other than the legal eagles — that the provisions of Title 28 U.S. Code sec. 455 covering the recusal of judges, justices, and magistrate judges would provide such a compelling reason to sink the nomination of Harriet Miers to our Highest Court. Mr. Wohlstetter over at American Spectator tells us all about it. Or rather, at least enough to raise a very serious question regarding the nominee's suitability.
 
Funny, but you just don't know what you don't know. As the Wall Street Journal's "Best of the Web" would put it, that's why we have experts.
 
Dennis Sevakis   10 06 05