The Supreme Court, bastion of conservatism

[UVACoug]

This would have probably easily gone the other way given the default with Roberts is usually to side with the executive branch, even when Obama was president. This was pretty remarkable for him to say to the government that their argument for why they needed the citizenship question was "contrived." He did leave it open for them to provide a better answer. I also think it's pretty crazy that they allowed some political activist/consultant to tell them what false rationale to use to add the question,

You may be right. Almost the entire opinion was very deferential and read like Roberts was going to side with the government. Then there is one section tacked on about pretext. I think that section is a little incoherent and I tend to agree with the conservative justices that it creates a bad precedent that will lead to a lot of frivolous litigation. Maybe Roberts was convinced by the post-argument evidence that there was something more nefarious going on and decided he needed to come up with some rationale to stop it at the last minute. Ideally, the Court would have delayed the decision and asked for supplemental briefing (and perhaps supplemental argument), but the decision was time sensitive so I'm not sure that was a good option.

[Uncle Ted]

All 83 Ethics Complaints Against Justice Brett Kavanaugh Have Been Dismissed For Good

All of the 83 ethics complaints filed against Justice Brett Kavanaugh during and after his confirmation to the US Supreme Court will remain dismissed, a nationwide committee of federal judges concluded Thursday, marking the judiciary's final word on the subject.


The decision from the Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability confirms a ruling in late 2018 from an intermediate panel of judges dismissing the complaints, finding that Kavanaugh stopped being covered by the federal judiciary's internal ethics review system the moment he was confirmed to former justice Anthony Kennedy's seat in October.

There is no appeal option from here. The Supreme Court doesn't have its own formal ethics review process like the one that covers the federal appeals and district courts, and Thursday's decision makes clear that conduct by a lower court judge — Kavanaugh previously served on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit — falls outside of the judiciary's ethics review process as soon as that judge is elevated to the Supreme Court.


The only body with the power to take action against Kavanaugh now is Congress, and notwithstanding fierce Democratic opposition to his nomination, there's been no effort by lawmakers to act so far. Supreme Court justices, like federal judges in the lower courts, can be impeached for misconduct, but it's extremely rare.
[...]

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...-supreme-court


But what about the DNA test to show that he is actually Hitler? Did the Dems get the DNA test?

[beefytee]

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...-supreme-court


But what about the DNA test to show that he is actually Hitler? Did the Dems get the DNA test?

I'm not interested in continuing the Kavanuagh witch-hunt, but reading your snippet it doesn't sound like they exonerated him or that there wasn't enough to go forward with. They just stopped looking because he was on the supreme court now. Basically the reviews became N/A since there isn't anything the committee can do to supreme court judges.

Seems much like the "You can't indict a sitting President" and the only actions that can be taken is by congress.


Is this accurate?

[Sleeping in EQ]

I'm not interested in continuing the Kavanuagh witch-hunt, but reading your snippet it doesn't sound like they exonerated him or that there wasn't enough to go forward with. They just stopped looking because he was on the supreme court now. Basically the reviews became N/A since there isn't anything the committee can do to supreme court judges.

Seems much like the "You can't indict a sitting President" and the only actions that can be taken is by congress.


Is this accurate?

I'm no fan of Kavanuagh, but they didn't even have any corroborating witnesses that placed him at the scene. Just let that sink in a little bit.

His getting upset is understandable.

[Moliere]

Bump

Dems looking for strike two. Maybe they should just endorse Trump

[Pelado]

Bump

Dems looking for strike two. Maybe they should just endorse Trump

Is there any new information? What is the genesis of this recent impeachment push?

[Moliere]

Is there any new information? What is the genesis of this recent impeachment push?

I’m not sure, but sounds like a book is coming out so it’s resurfacing.

[Uncle Ted]

Bump

Dems looking for strike two. Maybe they should just endorse Trump

Yep...

The New York Times Anti-Kavanaugh Bombshell Is Actually a Dud

Of course, that doesn't stop the 2020 Dems from jumping all over it...

Embedded Tweet

Ruthie likes Kavanaugh, however. Maybe she likes beer too.

[cowboy]

Yep...

The New York Times Anti-Kavanaugh Bombshell Is Actually a Dud

Of course, that doesn't stop the 2020 Dems from jumping all over it...

Lol. From the story's comment section:

NY Times reporting: "My best friend’s sister’s boyfriend’s brother’s girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid who’s going with a girl who saw Ferris pass-out at 31 Flavors last night. I guess it’s pretty serious."

[UVACoug]

I’m not sure, but sounds like a book is coming out so it’s resurfacing.

Yep. The New York Times published a column that was really nothing more than a book advertisement rehashing what we knew before, and it reignited the psychos on the left again.

[Uncle Ted]

'I was angry, and I sent it out': Woman admits she fabricated a claim about writing an anonymous letter that accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault

• Senate Judiciary Committee investigators said that a woman who claimed to be the author of an anonymous sexual-assault allegation against Justice Brett Kavanaugh had "fabricated" the claim.
• Republican Sen. Grassley of Iowa said his committee had investigated the allegations made by Judy Munro-Leighton, a Kentucky woman who claimed she was the author of an anonymous letter that detailed graphic sexual-assault allegations.
• The "Jane Doe" in the letter claimed that Kavanaugh and his friend "sexually assaulted and raped me in his car," but provided no timeframe of the incident, and no return address.
• Munro-Leighton later sent an email claiming she was Doe. Investigators were able to find Munro-Leighton due to her "relatively unique name," and determined she was an "activist ... decades older than Judge Kavanaugh."
• Munro-Leighton, who had never met Kavanaugh in person, "admitted, contrary to her prior claims, that she had not been sexually assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh and was not the author of the original 'Jane Doe' letter,'" Grassley's office said.
• Grassley urged the FBI and attorney general to give "utmost consideration" to the case, but added that Munro-Leighton's fabricated allegations should not discount sexual assault claims that were made in "good faith."

[...]

https://www.businessinsider.com/bret...leighton-2018-

[Bo Diddley]

https://www.businessinsider.com/bret...leighton-2018-

That's interesting timing. My company commander just dropped the statistic that an American is sexually assaulted every two minutes. Obviously that's an estimate, but I wonder how close that is. It sickens me when i hear people make false claims, which leads to people questionong real victims.

[myboynoah]

https://www.businessinsider.com/bret...leighton-2018-

link doesn't work

[BigPiney]

link doesn't work

It was also a year old story

[frank ryan]

That's interesting timing. My company commander just dropped the statistic that an American is sexually assaulted every two minutes. Obviously that's an estimate, but I wonder how close that is. It sickens me when i hear people make false claims, which leads to people questionong real victims.

I suspect your commander's stat is close to accurate. Most victims don't report these crimes, especially children.