I do not understand why so called progressive authors keep writing such non-stories. Amy Coney Barrett “must recuse herself”? Isn’t that a lot like “progressives making demands”? Since when did such dogmatic pronouncements, from positions of zero authority and whose opinions command zero respect, do any good? Of course she will not recuse herself! Of course progressive demands will go unanswered and disrespected. In what fairy tale world do these authors live? It’s not the world I’ve been living in for more than 70 years.
This story is written by a law professor, so I hate do dismiss it out of hand, but I’m not buying the argument. I expect a judge to recuse themselves when there is a present or future conflict of interest, not to prevent positive payback to the president that got them into their position. So I think it was outrageous that Sandra Day O’Conner did not recuse herself from Bush v Gore since she had a conflict of interest where she wanted Bush to win so she could retire in a few years under a Republican admin. Barrett is confirmed now, obviously has no plans to retire anytime soon, and will be ruling on all sorts of things where people could argue she has a desire to please her masters - that really isn’t a sufficient argument to push the recusal idea (we couldn’t get O’Conner to recuse, I don’t see how this type of plea goes anywhere).
Happy CD anniversary Dara. I’ve always respected your thoughtful replies and value your point of view.