As Twitchy reported earlier, Chief Justice John Roberts has delivered a "thanks, but no thanks" reply to Democrat Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse and Dick Durbin's request for a meeting to discuss Justice Samuel Alito flying a "MAGA battle flag" over his beach house last summer. This is the same MAGA battle flag that flew over San Francisco City Hall for decades before it was quietly taken down Saturday.

Democrats are desperate that Justices Alito and Clarence Thomas recuse themselves from any cases involving January 6, seeing as they're both insurrectionist sympathizers. Rep. Jamie Raskin, who you think would have embarrassed himself enough on the January 6 select committee, has an op-ed in the New York Times Wednesday explaining that recusal is not a "friendly suggestion." He argues that the Department of Justice can force Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves.

“This recusal statute, if triggered, is not a friendly suggestion. It is Congress’s command, binding on the justices, just as the due process clause is. The Supreme Court cannot disregard this law just because it directly affects one or two of its justices. Ignoring it would trespass on the constitutional separation of powers because the justices would essentially be saying that they have the power to override a congressional command.”

President Joe Biden was bragging again about disregarding the Supreme Court's ruling on student loan forgiveness just yesterday in Philadelphia. Why isn't Raskin flipping out over the constitutional separation of powers there?

The Hill reports:

Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that the Department of Justice could force the recusals of Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito in cases the court is facing related to the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

“Everyone assumes that nothing can be done about the recusal situation because the highest court in the land has the lowest ethical standards — no binding ethics code or process outside of personal reflection,” the Maryland Democrat said in an opinion piece in The New York Times published Wednesday. “Each justice decides for him- or herself whether he or she can be impartial.”

…

“The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion: the Constitution of the United States, specifically the due process clause, and the federal statute mandating judicial disqualification for questionable impartiality, 28 U.S.C. Section 455,” Raskin said.

Raskin needs to let this go.

Democrats don't control the Supreme Court, and it has driven them insane.

Does Raskin want Alito and Thomas handcuffed and frog-marched out of the Supreme Court?

That's right, he tried to stop the certification of Donald Trump's election:

The Supreme Court has already made itself perfectly clear, and no amount of whining from Congress is going to change that.