{"id":1534767,"date":"2022-07-01T10:35:38","date_gmt":"2022-07-01T14:35:38","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1534767"},"modified":"2022-07-01T10:35:51","modified_gmt":"2022-07-01T14:35:51","slug":"aoc-makes-absurd-argument-for-impeaching-scotus-justices","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/aoc-makes-absurd-argument-for-impeaching-scotus-justices\/","title":{"rendered":"AOC Makes Absurd Argument for Impeaching SCOTUS Justices"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">16<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2Faoc-makes-absurd-argument-for-impeaching-scotus-justices%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=1534767&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><div><\/div>\n<p><span class=\"ArticlePage-articleBody-firstLetter\">I<\/span>t<i> <\/i>was inevitable that the Supreme Court\u2019s recent decision to overturn <i>Roe v. Wade<\/i> would prompt tremendous backlash from liberals.\n<\/p>\n<p>But Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has taken things a step further than most of her allies, even floating the idea that several conservative Supreme Court justices should be impeached and removed from their positions.\n<\/p>\n<p>For context, AOC is one of the many liberals<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/opinion\/mass-delusion-leftists-think-barrett-kavanaugh-gorsuch-promised-to-uphold-roe\">falsely<\/a><br \/>\n claiming that Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett &#8220;lied under oath&#8221; during their confirmation hearings. These critics are (<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.washingtonexaminer.com\/opinion\/mass-delusion-leftists-think-barrett-kavanaugh-gorsuch-promised-to-uphold-roe\">incorrectly<\/a><br \/>\n) suggesting that the justices promised not to overturn <i>Roe v. Wade <\/i>in their sworn Senate testimony. AOC also apparently thinks they should be impeached for this supposed lie because lying under oath is a crime.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;I believe lying under oath is an impeachable offense \u2026 and I believe that this is something that should be very seriously considered,&#8221; the congresswoman said on MSNBC\u2019s <i>Meet the Press.\u00a0<\/i>&#8220;We have a responsibility to protect our democracy,\u201d she<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/AOC\/status\/1541070051733815298\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">added<\/a><br \/>\n on Twitter. \u201cThat includes holding those in power who violate the law accountable. Without it, rule of law can slip through our hands like sand through loose fingers.\u201d\n<\/p>\n<p>Even for AOC, this argument is outrageous and absurd.\n<\/p>\n<p>First things first. The justices didn\u2019t lie under oath. Nothing they said comes anywhere close to perjury. It doesn\u2019t take a lawyer or a genius to see this, just a semiliterate human with basic access to Google. We have the receipts on what the justices specifically said during their hearings. Here\u2019s what Gorsuch<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.wsj.com\/articles\/lie-senate-justice-gorsuch-kavanaugh-collins-manchin-aoc-meet-the-press-abortion-dobbs-roe-casey-ginsburg-11656277455\">actually said<\/a><br \/>\n under oath, according to the <i>Wall Street Journal<\/i>:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;<i>Roe v. Wade<\/i>, decided in 1973, is a precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed. &#8230; So a good judge will consider it as precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court worthy as treatment of precedent like any other. If I were to start telling you which are my favorite precedents or which are my least favorite precedents, or if I viewed precedent in that fashion, I would be tipping my hand and suggesting to litigants that I have already made up my mind about their cases.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Here\u2019s what Kavanaugh said, according to the <i>Wall Street<\/i> <i>Journal<\/i>:\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;<i>Roe v. Wade<\/i> is an important precedent of the Supreme Court. It has been reaffirmed many times. It was reaffirmed in<i> Planned Parenthood v. Casey<\/i> in 1992. &#8230; So that precedent on precedent is quite important as you think about stare decisis in this context.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>Other, liberal-leaning sources such as NPR also<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.npr.org\/2022\/05\/03\/1096108319\/roe-v-wade-alito-conservative-justices-confirmation-hearings?t=1656093703506\">recount<\/a><br \/>\n the justices&#8217; testimony and do not present any statements in which they made any promises not to overturn <i>Roe<\/i>.\n<\/p>\n<p>Nowhere in the above does either justice say they will not overturn <i>Roe v. Wade<\/i>. They simply acknowledge that it was a precedent, a statement of fact, and then say that they will give it the accompanying respect that precedents deserve. But no justice defers completely to precedent. Every single member of the current Supreme Court, including the liberal justices, has voted to overturn precedents in the past.\n<\/p>\n<p>Were Gorsuch and Kavanaugh intentionally vague? Did they give generic nonanswers that obscured their views on <i>Roe v. Wade<\/i> and other controversial precedents? Yeah, sure. But that\u2019s what all Supreme Court nominees do these days, thanks to a<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.npr.org\/2018\/07\/13\/628711698\/the-reality-of-the-ginsburg-rule\">confirmation tactic<\/a><br \/>\n first started by the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg, albeit to a lesser extent.\n<\/p>\n<p>Amy Coney Barrett, for her part,<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.reuters.com\/article\/factcheck-barrett-abortion-idUSL1N2YB1V3\">specifically said<\/a><br \/>\n during her confirmation hearing that <i>Roe v. Wade<\/i> was not a &#8220;superprecedent&#8221; considered beyond the pale of being overturned. So, no, AOC, the justices did not lie under oath. Not even close. As a result, AOC\u2019s argument for impeaching them is empty and absurd.\n<\/p>\n<p>Democrats, disagree with the Supreme Court\u2019s ruling all you want. Make your case about abortion to the public, now that abortion policies will be decided at the state level. But don\u2019t stoop to false history and character assassination to do it.\n<\/p>\n<p><i>Brad Polumbo (<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/brad_polumbo\">@Brad_Polumbo<\/a><br \/>\n) is a co-founder of<br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/www.based-politics.com\/\">Based-Politics.com<\/a><br \/>\n, a co-host of the <\/i>BasedPolitics<i><br \/>\n<a class=\"Link\" href=\"https:\/\/podcasts.apple.com\/us\/podcast\/based-politics\/id1535704082\">podcast<\/a><br \/>\n, and a <\/i>Washington Examiner <i>contributor.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>It was inevitable that the Supreme Court\u2019s recent decision to overturn Roe v. Wade would prompt tremendous backlash from liberals. But Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has taken things a step<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":2315279,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1534767","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1534767","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1534767"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1534767\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2315279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1534767"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1534767"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1534767"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}