No, Justices Did Not Commit Perjury in Their Confirmation Hearings When Asked Ab

[Ptarmigan]

No, Justices Did Not Commit Perjury in Their Confirmation Hearings When Asked About Roe
https://jonathanturley.org/2022/05/04/no-conservative-justices-did-not-commit-perjury-in-confirmation-on-reversing-roe/

The response to the leaked draft opinion overturning Roe v. Wade has unleashed a torrent of outrage on the left. While many are calling for marches and sweeping new legislation, some are focused on calling out the justices in the majority for alleged “perjury” or “lying” in their confirmation hearings, particularly Justices Samuel Alito, Brett Kavanaugh, and Neil Gorsuch. In reality, they did not lie in testimony in referencing Roe as established precedent.  The suggestion of perjury is utter nonsense.

The draft opinion written by Justice Alito declares “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled. It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

Sen. Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) declared that some of the conservative justices “have lied to the U.S. Senate.” Sen. Susan Collins (R., Me.) publicly decried what she claimed were false or misleading answers on Roe by Justices Alito and Kavanaugh.

No less a legal figure as Stephen Colbert declared “They knew, that if they were honest, they wouldn’t get the job. So they lied, which I think is perjury. But what do I know? I’m no Supreme Court justice, I’m not a good enough liar.”

The left talks about charging Supreme Court judges for perjury. Talk about a slippery slope.

[RuralNc]

The answers were just vague enough, to answer the basic question.

Something tells me though, the next time an (R) is in power and nominates a Judge, the grilling is going to be very specific.

[Eupher]

The answers were just vague enough, to answer the basic question.

Something tells me though, the next time an (R) is in power and nominates a Judge, the grilling is going to be very specific.

The questions are specific enough, in my view. But SCOTUS candidates, like those appearing before Congress, recognize hostile questioners and do a credible job of avoiding answering the question in the manner the questioner wants. Turley does a great job in refuting the great legal minds like Colbert. 

[RuralNc]

Its always interesting listening to the Q & A. Because at the heart of it, they are all a bunch of Lawyers that know whats going on. It honestly feels more like a dog and pony show.

[Eupher]

Its always interesting listening to the Q & A. Because at the heart of it, they are all a bunch of Lawyers that know whats going on. It honestly feels more like a dog and pony show.

Yup. That's because it is a dog and pony show. Some dogs and ponies command more air time than others. Ted Cruz, for example. He gets more air time than even Schumer or McConnell. But Kennedy's catching on quick.