Should Kagan recuse herself? Of course, and here is why.

(CNSNews.com) - Internal Justice Department email communications made just days before the House of Representatives passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act show that then-Solicitor General Elena Kagan was brought into the loop as DOJ began preparing to respond to an anticipated legal complaint that Mark Levin and the Landmark Legal Foundation were planning to file against the act if the House used a procedural rule to “deem” the bill passed even if members never directly voted on it.

In another internal DOJ email communication that same week, Kagan alerted the chief of DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel to the constitutional argument that a former U.S. Appeals Court judge was making against the use of this rule.

Then, during Kagan’s Supreme Court confirmation process four months later, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee asked her in writing if she had “ever been asked about your opinion” or “offered any view or comments” on the “the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to any proposed health care legislation, including but not limited to Pub. L. No. 111-148 [PPACA], or the underlying legal or constitutional issues related to potential litigation resulting from such legislation?"

Kagan answered both questions: “No.” -- CNS

Turns out that was a lie. As Solicitor General in the Obama Administration, Supreme Court Justice, Elena Kagan actually helped craft a strategy for defeating those who would try to take ObamaCare down. Should she, therefore, recues herself? That is a no brainer, but, since when does the law and/or moral priorities have anything to do what this Administration.

Some argue that Clarence Thomas should, also, recuse himself, because his wife is an active lobbyist against ObamaCare. But, of course, there is a big difference between being a "primary opponent" and being married to one. -- blog editor.