|
@SIfill@sifill.bsky.social |
I love @repraskin’s piece. The point - as I’ve been saying for some time - is that recusal is not abt letters & mtgs w/members of Congress. It is a tool available to PARTIES in litigation & is part of a litigant’s due process rights. In the immunity case the party is the UNITED STATES (you & me).
1 replies 16 reposts 61 likes
|
|
@SIfill
@sifill.bsky.social
[ View ] |
We are entitled to zealous representation.I would have liked to see the SG file a motion to recuse & to receive a ruling-not a ltr- from the justices. Same for the parties in the Sec 3 case. The silence from attys representing the party in the immunity case is acquiescence to the improper conduct.
1 replies 5 reposts 31 likes