Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
House Oversight Dems demand of CJ Roberts why Justice Alito allowed to remain on J6 case despite conflict-of-interest
Oversight Committee Democrats
NEW: Ranking Member Rep Raskin and Rep Ocasio-Cortez demand Chief Justice Roberts explain why he allowed Justice Alito to remain on Jan. 6 case despite recognizing conflict of interest:
12:36 PM · Oct 4, 2024
NEW: Ranking Member Rep Raskin and Rep Ocasio-Cortez demand Chief Justice Roberts explain why he allowed Justice Alito to remain on Jan. 6 case despite recognizing conflict of interest:
12:36 PM · Oct 4, 2024
Ranking Member Raskin and Rep. Ocasio-Cortez Demand Chief Justice Roberts Explain Why He Allowed Justice Alito to Remain on Jan. 6 Case Despite Recognizing Conflict of Interest
October 4, 2024
Press Release
Chief Justice Roberts Took the “Highly Unusual” Step of Replacing of Justice Alito as Author on the Fischer Case Following Reports of Ties to “Stop the Steal” Movement Yet Allowed Him to Remain on the Case
Washington, D.C. (October 4, 2024)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Vice Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts demanding an explanation for his decision to replace Justice Samuel Alito as the author of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Fischer v. United States, a case involving the January 6 insurrection, just days after the public learned that he repeatedly flew flags and banners supportive of the January 6 insurrectionists while allowing him to remain on the case.
“Recent reporting by the New York Times suggests that you took the ‘highly unusual’ step of replacing Justice Alito as the author of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Fischer v. United States, a case involving the January 6 insurrection, just days after the public learned that Justice Alito and his spouse repeatedly flew flags and banners supportive of the insurrectionists and the ‘Stop the Steal’ movement. Your decision suggests that you recognized that Justice Alito’s partisan ideological activity called into question his impartiality with regard to the Fischer matter. Yet, Justice Alito, like Justice Clarence Thomas, whose own ties to the ‘Stop the Steal’ movement are well established, was allowed to participate in the Fischer case, in violation of the Court’s institutional commitment to the principle that a Justice must ‘disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the Justice’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned,’” wrote the Members.
/snip
October 4, 2024
Press Release
Chief Justice Roberts Took the “Highly Unusual” Step of Replacing of Justice Alito as Author on the Fischer Case Following Reports of Ties to “Stop the Steal” Movement Yet Allowed Him to Remain on the Case
Washington, D.C. (October 4, 2024)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Vice Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Accountability, sent a letter to Chief Justice John Roberts demanding an explanation for his decision to replace Justice Samuel Alito as the author of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Fischer v. United States, a case involving the January 6 insurrection, just days after the public learned that he repeatedly flew flags and banners supportive of the January 6 insurrectionists while allowing him to remain on the case.
“Recent reporting by the New York Times suggests that you took the ‘highly unusual’ step of replacing Justice Alito as the author of the Supreme Court’s opinion in Fischer v. United States, a case involving the January 6 insurrection, just days after the public learned that Justice Alito and his spouse repeatedly flew flags and banners supportive of the insurrectionists and the ‘Stop the Steal’ movement. Your decision suggests that you recognized that Justice Alito’s partisan ideological activity called into question his impartiality with regard to the Fischer matter. Yet, Justice Alito, like Justice Clarence Thomas, whose own ties to the ‘Stop the Steal’ movement are well established, was allowed to participate in the Fischer case, in violation of the Court’s institutional commitment to the principle that a Justice must ‘disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the Justice’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned,’” wrote the Members.
/snip
We really need to take back the House - we need committee chairmanships back!
Link to tweet
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
