Merger Madness: Brian Stelter Laughably Describes CNN As ‘Balanced and Fact-Based’ News Ne...
Hey Look! That Thing Dems Say Never Happens (Voter Fraud) Happened AGAIN Multiple...
Peddling ‘Pedo’: Rachel Maddow and Other Media Hacks Toss Their So-Called Principles to...
Republican Senators Slow Walking the SAVE Act Get a Rude Awakening
Meteorologist Rains on Al Gore's 'Inconvenient Truth' Anniversary Parade With Some Inconve...
Bill Clinton's Opening Statement at the Epstein Deposition Sure Brings Back Some Memories
'Legit Funny'! Jim Acosta Says Free Speech Is at Risk (and Tries to...
Hillary Clinton Explains Why Ghislaine Maxwell Was at Her Daughter's Wedding (Then Avoids...
Rep Plays 'Didn't Know About That' Card When Pinned Down About Epstein Files...
A Stitt Storm: Oklahoma Governor Under Fire for Saying Dems Don't Want to...
'I'm Not Kidding': Retired Professor Says He Ordered a 'Gun' to Hopefully Shoot...
NBC News: Members of Team USA Expressing Regret for Laughing at Trump’s Joke
Misery Loves Company: Rapinoe Dumps on Olympic Glory to Remind Everyone She's Still...
Toronto Star Writer Still Butthurt About Team USA Hockey Captain Meeting Trump
Marco Cubio Leads the Pack: Twitter Conquers Cuba with the Funniest New Territory...

'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