U.S. District Judge Ellen Huvelle, a Clinton appointee, ironically provided evidence last week that seals the case that Justice Elena Kagan is required by law to recuse herself from cases challenging Obamacare.

The law in question is 28 U.S.C. 455. It mandates that a justice "shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might be reasonably questioned" or "(w)here he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceedings ..."

Here is why Kagan must recuse:

In December 2009, the Senate passed the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act — or "Obamacare." Its fate then moved to the House. Within days, states were threatening to challenge Obamacare in court if it were enacted.

Kagan was then President Obama's solicitor general. Her job was to defend his administration's positions in federal court disputes...

The House of representatives will vote next week on legislation that would stop abortion funding in Obamacare, the national health care plan that contains no limits on taxpayer funding of abortions.

H.R. 358, Protect Life Act, will likely come up for a vote on the House floor next Thursday after pro-life lawmakers fended off numerous hostile amendments from pro-abortion members of Congress during the committee markup. Capital Hill sources informed LifeNews today that they expect pro-abortion lawmakers to offer many of those weakening amendments that would water down the bill on the House floor.

The Protect Life Act makes it clear that no funds authorized or appropriated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), including tax credits and cost-sharing reductions, may be used to pay for abortion or abortion coverage.

(CNSNews.com) - Bantering with the audience at a fundraiser in St. Louis yesterday, President Barack Obama bragged about a new regulation, proposed by the Department of Health and Human Services, that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has denounced as an “unprecedented attack on religious liberty.”

"Darn right!" an audience member at the fundraiser shouted as Obama described the regulation.

“Darn tooting!” Obama said back.

The proposed regulation, designed to implement part of Obamacare, will require all private health plans in the United States to cover sterilizations and all FDA-approved contraceptives--including those that cause abortions—without charging any fees or co-pay. These regulations were drawn to implement a provision in Obama’s health-care law that calls for all health-care plans to cover “preventive services”...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's sweeping healthcare overhaul will top the agenda in the new U.S. Supreme Court term that opens on Monday and could be the most momentous in decades.

Returning from its three-month recess, the nation's highest court will confront legal challenges seeking to strike down Obama's signature domestic policy achievement and a host of other charged issues in its 2011-12 term.

Other big cases pit privacy rights against new police tracking technology, involve jail strip searches and address a free-speech challenge by broadcasters to a U.S. government ban on nudity and blurted expletives on television.

More blockbuster cases on using race in college admissions, on Arizona's tough law cracking down on illegal immigrants and on the rights of same-sex adoptive parents may be added to the docket later in the nine-month session...

Why did the Obama administration, after dragging out the various court challenges to ObamaCare, suddenly step on the gas?

The administration surprised court watchers by passing up a chance to slow down ObamaCare's long march to an eventual Supreme Court ruling. In failing to request a hearing by all the appeals court judges of the 11th Circuit -- to overturn an anti-ObamaCare decision by three of its members -- the administration now puts the matter on a faster track to the Supreme Court.

The court will likely agree to hear the case because two appellate circuit courts, the 11th and 6th, have issued contradictory rulings -- one striking down the individual mandate as unconstitutional, and the other upholding it. This confusion practically guarantees a hearing by the top court, probably months before next year's election.

What provoked the administration's change of heart....

The U.S. Supreme Court appears to be the location for the final battle next summer over the legality of Obamacare, the government-run health care scheme that pro-life groups opposed because it allows abortion funding and prompts rationing concerns.

Late Monday, the Obama administration said it would not ask the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit to take up the case on appeal from a judge in Florida, who ruled Obamacare unconstitutional in the case involving Florida and dozens of other states that have signed on to the lawsuit. Last month, a three-judge panel issued a 2-1 ruling agreeing with the federal judge and saying Congress went too far constitutionally in passing Obamacare.

The Supreme Court, according to a Washington Post report, would likely receive the case sometime next summer — during the intensity of the presidential election, which will likely focus in part on the much-maligned Obamacare law that a majority of Americans continue to oppose.

A "glitch" has been found in Barack Obama's healthcare plan that one health policy expert says could "unravel" the law.

Beginning in 2014, the federal government will impose price controls on health insurance, while requiring that virtually every American purchase health coverage. As part of an effort to help Americans afford more costly premiums, Congress will offer assistance through health insurance exchanges that are supposed to be set up by the states. Should a state decide not to create an exchange, the federal government will create one. That, according to the Cato Institute's Michael Cannon, is where the glitch is found.

"[ObamaCare] only authorizes premium assistance in state-run exchanges. It does not offer premium assistance in federal exchanges," the health policy expert explained in a recent podcast.

But this problem, he believes, gives states that are fighting ObamaCare a much stronger hand...

Last night’s Republican debate — unlike the one last week — touched briefly on pro-life issues and featured a heated exchange between a couple of the candidates and pro-life Texas Gov. Rick Perry over the issue of parental rights.

Because none of the questions from the Tea Party participants or CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer queried about pro-life issues, Michele Bachmann, the pro-life Minnesota congresswoman, was the first to bring up the issue of abortion, doing so on her own.

He may have dropped out of the running for the presidency, but Tim Pawlenty isn't sitting on the sidelines - the former presidential candidate has endorsed Mitt Romney for president.

Pawlenty, who garnered early attention in his own presidential race but dropped out after a third-place showing in Iowa's straw poll last month, threw his weight behind former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney Monday on Fox News.

"There's one candidate in this race who's unmatched in his skills and experience and talent when it comes to turning around this economy and growing jobs, and that's Mitt Romney," Pawlenty said.

A new study from England finds unborn children have the capacity to differentiate touch from pain in the womb and they are able to do so as early as 28-35 weeks into pregnancy. Other studies have shown unborn children can experience pain much earlier.

Conducted by researchers at the University College London, the study found unborn children can feel pain around the 35th week of pregnancy.