Beshear Madness: ‘Moderate’ Dem Kentucky Governor Wants to Abolish the Electoral College
Kristen Welker of NBC News Goes After AG Todd Blanche for Not Treating...
Cuban Snivel Crisis: Mavs Billionaire Mad at Khanna’s Wealth Tax, Touted Harris As...
It's Not 'Brat Summer' Anymore: Democrat Mary Peltola REJECTS Endorsement From Kamala Harr...
Erick Erickson Spots an Ongoing Theme With the Vice President
What's the Difference?: Maggie Haberman Says Trump Is a ‘Construction Guy’ Not a...
Terry Moran Says ABC News Is ‘Liberal Institution’ That Lacks ‘Viewpoint Diversity’ —...
Meltdowns Incoming! Sophie Cunningham Celebrates Her Birthday With Some Raucous Patriotism
Price Caps Growing Popular, Frank Luntz Reports
Go HOME. You're DRUNK: Pramila Jayapal Thinks Medicare for All Is a Human...
In AMERICA?! WHAT?! WATCH Virginia Small Business Owner Kick Client Out After Learning...
Doesn't Give a S**T About These Sailors: Gold Star Wife Takes Jim Acosta...
Somali? Fraudsters Vandalizing MN GOP Candidate's Car SO DUMB They Missed the CAMERA...
If What Happened to Mark Kelly at This Conference Is Indicative of Dem...
Rashida Tlaib Sucks. That's It. That's the Headline. (Hint: Hands Up Don't Shoot)

'Alexa, how does the judicial branch work?' Prog groups want Brett Kavanaugh to recuse himself from upcoming SCOTUS case because he has an opinion

Next year, the Supreme Court is set to hear a case on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and that’s apparently a problem for some progressive groups. You know, because Brett Kavanaugh (of course). See, Kavanaugh has gone on the record in the past with opinions about the CFPB that these groups don’t agree with.

Advertisement

More from CNBC:

“We call on Justice Kavanaugh to recuse himself from hearing a case on which he has already made up his mind,” the groups — Demand Justice, Demand Progress Education Fund, the Revolving Door Project and Allied Progress — wrote in a statement.

“The law clearly states that judges should recuse themselves when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Brett Kavanaugh has already ruled on the underlying legal question in this case. He cannot plausibly claim to be open to arguments from both sides,” they wrote.

In an opinion for a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in 2016, Kavanaugh wrote that the “concentration of massive, unchecked power in a single Director marks a dramatic departure from settled historical practice and makes the CFPB unique among independent agencies.”

The full court overturned his decision two years later, prompting Kavanaugh to pen a dissent that reiterated his belief that the agency’s structure was unconstitutional. That case is known as PHH Corp. v. CFPB.

“In PHH, Kavanaugh offered a more than 70 page long dissent which he told the Senate constituted one of the most ‘significant constitutional opinions’ of his judicial career,” the groups said. “Kavanaugh’s personal reputational interest in seeing that bitter dissent against a bipartisan majority be vindicated by the Supreme Court is considerable.”

Advertisement

They really are hell-bent on getting their revenge on Brett Kavanaugh because he dares to exist.

Apparently they do not.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement