Today, the RNLA filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against Democratic presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg and Bloomberg News, alleging that the way that Bloomberg News has announced that it will cover the presidential campaign constitutes an impermissible in-kind corporate contribution that is not subject to the media exemption.Read more
2019 Republican Lawyer of the Year, former FEC Chair, and RNLA Board of Governors member Lee Goodman appeared on CNBC earlier this week to discuss the unsuccessful effort by the Biden campaign to have Facebook remove a Trump campaign ad it claimed was inaccurate. Mr. Goodman summarized the law applicable to campaign ads:Read more
It does not take a deep dive into the facts to determine that the Democrats' partisan impeachment case is on very shaky ground. Actually, looking at the facts objectively from what we know from the Ukrainian perspective seems to show that former Vice President Biden, not President Trump, is the one whose activities should be receiving further scrutiny.
According to Webster’s a quid pro quo is "something given or received for something else." Democrats allege Trump wanted dirt on Biden in return for foreign aid. However, according to the New York Times reporter Ken Vogel: “The Ukrainians weren't made aware that the assistance was being delayed/reviewed until more than one month after the call."
While most of DC is focused on the “impeachment inquiry” into President Trump, Senate Judiciary Committee Member and Democratic Presidential Candidate Kamala Harris and far-left extremist groups like Demand Justice are calling for the impeachment of Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
Harris’ letter begins with citing her own questions and Senate floor speech as proof. Then she goes into details from the recently debunked and uncorroborated allegation from the book by a couple of New York Times reporters. As the Washington Examiner describes this:Read more
The tragic targeting of police officers by a shooter last night and the extreme partisanship of Polifact have brought back to the forefront controversial, politically charged lies told by Presidential candidates and Senators Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris over the weekend.Read more
There is a new, troubling trend among 2020 Democratic Presidential candidates this cycle: advocating and promoting a “litmus test,” or judicial philosophy benchmark, for judicial and Supreme Court candidates if he or she happens to be elected President of the United States.
Such a trend goes against the history of judicial nominations and threatens the principle of judicial independence. Some even call the implementation of a judicial litmus test as breaking the “political taboo.”Read more
Today, the RNLA's Judicial Affairs Committee released a second round of summaries on "2020 Democratic Presidential Candidates on Judges." The Judicial Affairs Committee has been reviewing and assessing top tier Democrat candidates and Democratic U.S. Senators contending to become the Democratic nominee for President and their positions on judges and the courts during the Trump Administration.
Last week, the committee released summaries on: Former Vice President Joe Biden, Senator Cory Booker, Senator Kamala Harris, Former Congressman Beto O'Rourke, Senator Bernie Sanders, and Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Today, summaries were released on Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York. A link to all the published summaries can be found on our home page here or via our blog article search here.
Below are a few of the extreme comments that Senators Klobuchar and Gillibrand have made regarding judges and the courts:Read more
This is another installment of an ongoing series of posts summarizing 2020 Democratic presidential candidates' views on judges and the courts. All posts in this series can be viewed here.
On Brett Kavanaugh: Voted No. [i]
On the nomination of Judge Kavanagh to the Supreme Court, Senator Klobuchar said the following:
- “There were many highly credentialed nominees like yourself [Judge Kavanaugh] that could have been sitting before us today, but—to my colleagues—what concerns me is that during this critical juncture in history, the President has hand-picked a nominee to the Court with the most expansive view of Presidential power possible… a nominee who has actually written that a President—on his own—can declare laws unconstitutional.” [ii]
- “I just think we could have had someone who was more independent.” [iii]
- In a television townhall, Senator Klobuchar: “[Judge Kavanaugh] was basically politicizing the whole judiciary with how he acted [during his confirmation hearings].” [iv]
On Neil Gorsuch: Voted No.[v]
On the nomination of Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, Senator Klobuchar stated:
- “After thorough examination and consideration, I have decided that I will not vote in favor of Judge Gorsuch’s nomination. His judicial record on critical issues including the rights of children with disabilities, campaign finance, and preserving health and safety protections have led me to conclude that I cannot support his nomination.” [vi]
- “I felt that he [Judge Gorsuch] was out of the mainstream, not really in—how he interacted personally. I had a very good conversation with him…I’m not going to relitigate the whole thing today, but there were some real concerns about his philosophy.”[vii]
Her opposition to Trump’s judicial nominees:
During the last Congress, Senator Klobuchar voted against Trump judicial nominations about half of the time, or 50.9% of the time. Of the 57 lower court judicial nominations, Senator Klobuchar voted to confirm 29 nominees. [viii]
- In September 2018, Senator Amy Klobuchar stated that she regrets Senate Democrats eliminating the filibuster for most judicial nominees in 2013. She went on to say: “I would prefer to bring it back…But we are where we are and now I don’t think anyone’s going to want to hamstring themselves.” [ix]
- Regarding the recent post-cloture time change in April to overcome Senate Democrat obstruction of Trump nominees, Senator Klobuchar stated: “I don’t know why they are continuing to pursue this [rule change] except that they want to ram through judges, they want to ram through Justice Department people.”[x]
- In apparent attempt to justify Senate Democrat obstruction on President Trump’s nominees, she made the follow remarks on the Senate Floor: “At a time of blistering rhetoric, anger and divisiveness, this is no time to cede this chamber’s ability to do its due diligence by removing the guardrails that help ensure judicial nominees have the qualifications for lifetime appointments to the federal bench.”[xi]