The controversial article Texas federal judge Matthew Kacsmaryk did not disclose to the Senate

In a still image from a video, Matthew Kacsmaryk, deputy counsel for the First Liberty Institute, answers questions during his nomination hearing by the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Dec. 13, 2017., The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.

What Kacsmaryk did not say in the email was that he had already been interviewed for a judgeship by his state’s two senators and was awaiting an interview at the White House., including “books, articles, reports, letters to the editor, editorial pieces, or other published material you have written or edited.”Texas Review of Law and Politics

The circumstances surrounding the article’s authorship raise questions about whether a judicial nominee was seeking to duck scrutiny from a process designed to ensure that judges are prepared to interpret the law without personal bias, said lawyers who worked on judicial nominations in Republican and Democratic administrations — speaking hypothetically and not specifically about Kacsmaryk.

To leave such a publication off the questionnaire, he added, is “unethical” and raises concerns about “the candor and honesty of the nominee.” When Kacsmaryk submitted the article in early 2017, he was deputy general counsel for First Liberty. By early April, he was well on his way to a judicial nomination. He was interviewed by members of the Federal Judicial Evaluation Committee in Dallas on March 3, then flew to D.C. to meet with Republican Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, both of Texas, on April 3, according to a timeline Kacsmaryk submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“For reasons I may discuss at a later date, First Liberty attorneys Justin Butterfield and Stephanie Taub will co-author the aforementioned article,” he said, according to an email obtained by The Post.Sasser, the First Liberty spokesman, said he had emails proving that Kacsmaryk was not the actual author but declined to share them with The Post.

Even after Butterfield and Taub were designated the authors, Kacsmaryk remained involved, the emails show, offering additional minor edits. The final version is almost identical to the one submitted under Kacsmaryk’s name.the article was published.

washingtonpost He is what becomes of school and town bullies

OGrady_Texas washingtonpost Deception is still a lie.

washingtonpost No one here is surprised. Keep it up, MAGA. You are going to destroy what little remains of a legitimate GOP. Many of us hope that you continue banning books, hating women and children, and disrespecting every aspect of the rule of law. The more you ignore your elected…

washingtonpost ... texas is a hell-hole of hateful SOB's

washingtonpost And to add: He wrote an amicus brief that pharmacies should not sell birth control pills AT ALL

washingtonpost Activist judges will ruin the country!

washingtonpost Of course he did. This should surprise no one.

washingtonpost A ghoul for authoring that article, and a coward for trying to hide it so he could get power.

washingtonpost Impeachment time

Entertainment Entertainment Latest News, Entertainment Entertainment Headlines

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

The controversial article Matthew Kacsmaryk did not disclose to the SenateThe judge who delivered a high-stakes abortion pills ruling last week removed his name from a law review article during his judicial nomination process, emails obtained by The Post show. Article “cannot use their pens to prescribe or dispense abortifacient drugs designed to kill unborn children.” Editor gets email: Citing “reasons I may discuss at a later date,” Kacsmaryk, who had been listed as the article’s sole author, said he would be removing his name I think the word here is LIAR. 'Doing the wrong thing for the Right Reason'. The Christian Cult Mantra.
Source: washingtonpost - 🏆 95. / 72 Read more »