Your current web browser is outdated. For best viewing experience, please consider upgrading to the latest version.

Donation - Other Level

Please use the quantity box to donate any amount you wish. Sign Up to Donate

Contact

Send a question or comment using the form below. This message may be routed through support staff.

Email Article

Password Reset Request

Register


Add a topic or expert to your feed.

Following

Follow Experts & Topics

Stay on top of our work by selecting topics and experts of interest.

Experts
Topics
Project
On The Ground
ERROR
Main Error Mesage Here
More detailed message would go here to provide context for the user and how to proceed
ERROR
Main Error Mesage Here
More detailed message would go here to provide context for the user and how to proceed

Manhattan Institute

search
Close Nav
Share this commentary on Close

Democrats Rage Against the Judiciary

commentary

Democrats Rage Against the Judiciary

The Wall Street Journal October 10, 2018
Legal ReformOther

Their campaign against Kavanaugh failed, so they resort to smearing the Supreme Court itself.

Brett Kavanaugh endured a Supreme Court confirmation ordeal like no other. He’s now Justice Kavanaugh, but that doesn’t mean the Democrats are done with him. Or even close to being done with him.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants the Federal Bureau of Investigation report on sexual-assault allegations, heretofore seen only by senators and staff, made public. Rep. Jerry Nadler, who’s in line to become chairman of the Judiciary Committee, has vowed to reopen investigations into Justice Kavanaugh’s background if Democrats win control of the House next month. Democrats aren’t playing up talk of impeachment, but they haven’t ruled it out.

Mr. Nadler knows that an attempt to remove a justice from the Supreme Court, which requires a two-thirds supermajority in the Senate, would almost certainly fail. And Mrs. Pelosi is well aware that there are very good reasons why FBI background checks are confidential. Information gathered could be sensitive or embarrassing; much of it is hearsay; and people are less likely to speak openly and honestly with investigators in the future if they have to worry about being publicly identified.

Continue reading the entire piece at The Wall Street Journal

______________________

Jason L. Riley is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a columnist at The Wall Street Journal, and a Fox News commentator. Follow him on Twitter here.

Photo by Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP/Getty via WSJ
Saved!
Close