Why Kavanaugh Cannot Be Impeached

in Important Issues

Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz believes that impeaching Justice Brett Kavanaugh would be “absolutely foolish, inconsistent,” and not allowed by the Constitution.

Dershowitz stated removing Kavanaugh would be “absolutely foolish, inconsistent, and hypocritical. Those who believe that Bill Clinton should never have been impeached for allegedly lying about his sex life are now going to lead the campaign to impeach Kavanaugh for allegedly lying about his sexual and drinking activities back when he was a 17-year-old? It’s hypocrisy run rampant. The Constitution would not permit impeachment of a sitting justice for actions he took while a private citizen 35 years ago, nor, I think, would it permit using the laws of perjury, which are very tough. They have to be about a material fact that has to have been a deliberate lie, not forgetfulness, not a boast, not an exaggeration, but a willful, deliberate lie about a material fact. I think that the Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot. We ought to be moving forward. Let’s judge Justice Kavanaugh on his performance as a justice of the Supreme Court.”

  • Dan Menard

    I don’t know who or how this could happen but, a new law needs to be passed on a “statutes of limitation”, where the alleged crime takes place in the distant pass.
    (like 36 years ago) If there is no historic complaint made at that time and this is not provable/creditable new information, then it should not be admissible as, and used as, a vendetta in current court procedures.

    • GomeznSA

      Dan – if I saw the info correctly, at the time of the alleged incident, there WAS a statute of limitations in place. I believe that the law has since been changed but the FACT is that there was no complaint or report filed within the required time limits in effect at the time.
      One has to wonder if any of us could now be subject to such allegations………………

      • Dan Menard

        Thanks for the info, Mr. G! We live and learn, don’t we?
        I knew of other situations where a limitation was applicable.
        If as you note there already is one in place, why did it not
        apply in this case? I know of a number of serious crimes that do
        exist limiting the time for prosecution. Common sense, and resent events, indicate that the Kavanaugh incident should also be covered
        under a limitation for prosecution! Again, thanks for your input.