Like many other liberals, I'm devastated by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, which opened the way for President Donald Trump to nominate a third Supreme Court justice in his first term. And I'm revolted by the hypocrisy of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's willingness to confirm Trump's nominee after refusing to even allow a vote on Judge Merrick Garland.
Yet these political judgments need to be distinguished from a separate question: what to think about Judge Amy Coney Barrett, whom Trump has told associates he plans to nominate. And here I want to be extremely clear. Regardless of what you or I may think of the circumstances of this nomination, Barrett is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court.
The president's rhetoric has put my party in the position of a firefighter who deliberately sets fires to look like a hero putting them out. Republicans need to take a hard look before advocating laws that actually do limit the franchise of otherwise qualified voters. Calling elections "fraudulent" and results "rigged" with almost nonexistent evidence is antithetical to being the "rule of law" party.
Zeke Emanuel has a message for jittery Americans ahead of a momentous election: Voting in person during the coronavirus pandemic is about as safe as going to the grocery store read more
President Donald Trump's campaign, ordered by a federal court judge in Pennsylvania to back up its claims of fraud in the state's vote-by-mail system, has documented only a handful of cases of election fraud in recent years -- none of which involved mail-in ballots. read more
This is a meticulously researched legal brief that describes in painstaking detail how Mr. Barr has violated his attorney's oath of office and rules of professional conduct.
That complaint asks the DC Bar's discipline office to investigate Mr. Barr's alleged ethical violations and determine what sanctions would be appropriate.
The complaint is a sober and comprehensive "bill of particulars." It challenges Mr. Barr's actions as to four basic matters: