I maintain that there is an absurdity and profound lack of understanding of this statute and point...
Quote:
... “Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or his spouse “is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding.”...
...The statute says “shall” — meaning, this is not discretionary. Congress has imposed on federal judges a mandatory duty to disqualify themselves if their impartiality might be reasonably questioned. It does not matter whether Thomas issued Graham’s desired stay or denied it; he wasn’t supposed to rule at all....
If anyone believes simply because there is no way to force a SC Justice to recuse and ultimately they alone decide means they are wrong not to.
And to the secondary point that you might have 'other reasonable people' disagree I think that is also a flaw in logic to think that is what is at issue.
I invite anyone to read the below disclosure that is coming out John Eastmans emails and say that Thomas should and has every right to stay on these cases if HE alone believes he is fine and conflict free and especially if there are others on the right (also considered 'reasonable men') who will argue he is fine to.
So if for one half the country reads the below and feels he has biad and should recuse, too bad, as 1/3rd thinks he does not and more importantly, he thinks he does not.
The Statute was never meant to be litigation about which side is correct and without a determination he does not have to recuse. It was always meant to be about the 'OTHERS'. Not the judge, and not his supporters. But those who HAD REASONABLE DOUBT. Those who MIGHT perceive bias and THEIR right to not be adjudicated under that doubt.
The standard Rococo supports means if a large percent of the country thinks the below is sufficient for recusal, but certain others do not, that it is not wrong for Thomas not to recuse in cases around that issue as long as Thomas believes it is not wrong. And lawyer or not I think Rococo is deeply wrong on that and that if you polled most lawyers in this area they would not agree with his position he has been saying here.
Trump lawyers saw Justice Thomas as 'only chance' to stop 2020 election certification
“We want to frame things so that Thomas could be the one to issue some sort of stay or other circuit justice opinion saying Georgia is in legitimate doubt,” Trump attorney Kenneth Chesebro wrote in an email exchange.
The emails were part of a batch that lawyer John Eastman had sought to withhold from the Jan. 6 select committee but that a judge ordered turned over anyway, describing them as evidence of likely crimes committed by Eastman and Donald Trump.