Thank goodness for the constitutional scholars at Fox News. After the Supreme Court announced they would rule on the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act’s individual mandate, Fox immediately seized on an obscure provision of the U.S. Constitution that would require "liberal" Justice Elena Kagan to recuse herself.
So obscure, in fact, it doesn't even exist…
Fox national correspondent Steve Centanni said Kagan's recusal may be required by "Article 28 of the Constitution." Fox's graphics department provided the relevant quote from the "U.S. Constitution, Article 28, Sec. 144"
Three glaring problems with this argument: The Constitution has no Article 28, has no Section 144, and does not contain the language quoted.
The Constitution actually contains seven articles, none of which have more than 10 sections. It also has 27 amendments, none of which contain anywhere near 144 sections.
The language Fox quoted from actually comes from a statute passed by Congress, Title 28 of the U.S. Code, Section 455. But that's the very statute legal ethicists have analyzed in finding that Kagan does not need to recuse herself because of the email.
Don’t blame Fox. They were just exercising their First Amendment right to not understand the Constitution. Or do anything resembling research.
As it says in Article 5493Q, Section Ke$ha, if you want something to be in the Constitution, just pretend it is. Like The Secret, but for our nation's fundamental laws and principles.
After all, it’s what our Founding Fathers Bill Cosby and Archie Bunker would have wanted.
Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images News/Getty Images
Tags: Constitution, Elena Kagan, Fox, Health Care, Judiciary, Supreme Court