Fox Cites Non-Existent Part Of The Constitution To Hype Argument For Kagan Recusal
For the second day in a row , Fox's "straight news" division has hyped the claim that U.S Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan should recuse herself from the case involving the constitutionality of a provision of the Affordable Care Act. Fox pointed to an email  Kagan sent to then-Justice Department adviser Laurence Tribe on the day the House of Representatives passed the Affordable Care Act in which Kagan said, "I hear they have the votes, Larry!! Simply amazing."
Legal ethicists have thrown cold water  on the argument that Kagan needs to recuse herself over that email. But Fox seems to have an argument that the legal ethicists haven't thought of: 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.
Here's video of the segment: