Who breaks a TIE on the SCOTUS?

[Atman]

Can't be a tie, right? There's nine people.

EXCEPT, with this brilliant tactical move by Bush in nominating Miers, his personal counsel. So when Bush or BushCo is finally brought up before the Supremes on either his own criminal activity, or due to one of his soon-to-come anti-constitutional presidential directives, won't his personal counsel have to recuse herself, leaving the specter of a tie very evident?

Isn't this nomination really just a way for Bush to gum up the whole process and keep Miers quiet about his own nefarious activity?

And further, as to the "talents" of this woman; she has one massive strike against her, in my book -- and it should be in the book of all dems, imo...anyone willing to defend this administration or its actions, that close to Bush, simply doesn't have the high moral fiber one should expect of a Supreme Court Justice. You have to be a shill and and a yes-man to work for Bush, as Alberto "Torture Boy" Gonzalez showed us all too well. Her judgement is already called into question just by her willingness to represent the Asshole In Chief.

[acmejack]

1. You expect Ethical behavior form these people?

Atman, I know you are not that naive! Recuse oneself? Never, they are immune to conflict of interest.

[Atman]

4. Yeah, it's early...what was I thinking?

ESPECIALLY with a woman of so little "stature." It's one thing for a strong, powerful nominee to cross Chimpy; this lo-level hack is probably still fawning over him, and not even through her first pad of personalized WH post-it notes. She'll remember who brought her to the dance, and she'll tango with her date like a good little crony.

[maine_raptor]

2. Who says she'll recuse herself?

Did Tony recuse himself when Big Dick's case came before them a little while ago?

[ComerPerro]

8. Exactly.

It won't matter, because she won't recuse herself at all.

[1932]

3. The lower appeals court decision stands.

[theboss]

5. On a tie, the lower court decision is affirmed

So, it's not really an advantage one way or the other for the administration since you never know what the lower court decison is going to be.

[bunkerbuster1]

7. The SCOTUS has been in this position before

and they've re-tried previously hung cases before, as well.

(That's if I can trust Nina Totenberg's historical review that was broadcast on NPR this morning.)

[triguy46]

6. Recuse is not a concept they recognize. n/t