I did read the decision and I think it's bullshit and is just a fancy way of saying he is above the law.
Liteky v. United States (1994)
The new catchall recusal provision, covering both 'interest or relationship' and 'bias or prejudice' grounds." When "such a high degree of favoritism or antagonism as to make fair judgment."
(Want the whole decision? look it up on
www.findlaw.com)
Scalia himself WROTE the majority opinion Liteky v. United States which is the standard now for Judicial recusal, and he used Liteky as his justification to recuse himself in the Supreme Courts Pledge of Alliegance case.
Why could he recuse himself so readily in that case but not this one?
Whether there was impropriety or not, there is a marked
perception that shady things could have gone on there. You recuse yourself. Let the case work itself out. The case can come to a conclusion in a split decision.
Quote:
“what matters is not the reality of bias or prejudice but its appearance.”
|
That's what it boils down to.