Biden judge: “Assault weapons may be banned because they’re extraordinary dangers and are not appropriate for legitimate self-defense purposes.”
The same Biden judge: “I am not a gun expert.” pic.twitter.com/c8IdhPZc4b
— John Kennedy (@SenJohnKennedy) March 20, 2024
U.S. District Judge Nancy Maldonado of the Northern District of Illinois faced some uncomfortable moments as President Biden’s pick for the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit when questioned about a brief she signed that defended Illinois state ban on “assault weapons” that was challenged in 2012.
Sen. John Kennedy during the hearing asked Judge Maldonado to define what she meant by “assault weapons.”
“You said, ‘Assault weapons may be banned because they’re extraordinarily dangerous and are not appropriate for legitimate self-defense purposes.’ Tell me what you meant by ‘assault weapons’?” the Louisiana Republican asked.
Judge Maldonado said she didn’t write the brief, that she was just local counsel and is not “a gun expert.”
The ban on semi-automatic assault weapons was upheld in Illinois.
“So you submitted a brief, an appellate brief, you signed it, and you don’t know what … and you said, ‘Abolish assault weapons,’ and you don’t know what you wanted them to abolish?” Mr. Kennedy said.
The judge said she doesn’t “remember the exact definition of assault weapons.”
“I was not responsible for researching the content,” she said.
— Mallory Wilson in Biden-nominated judge can’t define assault weapons in confirmation hearing
5 Responses
Amazing how someone this inept was ever qualified to be a judge.
Her saying she forgot the definition is a lie for she has never known and has and is following the patter of the democRat crowd.
Bet she doesn’t have a clue relative to the history of “gun control” either.
“Amazing how someone this inept was ever qualified to be a judge.”
With KBJ now on the High Court, anyone can be a Justice, it appears. No actual knowledge of biology or the law necessary. Just intersectional boxes checked and enuff feelz to make the “right” decisions.
“I was not responsible for researching the content,” she said.
Judge Maldonado said she didn’t write the brief, that she was just local counsel and is not “a gun expert.”
But she signed it making her responsible for what it said.
I wonder if I can use that excuse. Hmmm “Your honor, I was not responsible for researching the contents of the contract I signed, I didn’t write it.” – wonder how that would fly in her court?
Its judges like this, people like this, that make ya think wistfully about assaulting them with some kind of weapon.
Seriously, Biden wants to put judges on the federal bench that can;t even take the responsibility for their own actions, have no knowledge of what they say, yet they get to hold other responsible for their actions.
Any one else notice the similarity to Katanji Brown here? When she was asked what a woman was she said she didn’t know because she wasn’t a biologist. Now we have another left winger who is asked, basically, ‘what is an assault weapon’ and she says she is not “a gun expert.”
They are all very careful not to define ‘assault weapon’ in relation to civilian semi-auto firearms, because once they do they know they will loose everything because actually there is no such thing as an ‘assault weapon’ in relation to civilian semi-auto firearms. Anything can be called an ‘assault weapon’, even hands/feet, but calling it that does not mean it actually is an ‘assault weapon’.
.40 cal,
In fact, the various ethical rules applicable to lawyers in almost ALL states (can’t say, categorically, that it’s true in all, but I KNOW it’s true in MOST states) specifies that, when you make a presentation to the court under your name, YOU are directly responsible for the factual content of the submission. I have personally witnessed lawyers get sanctioned by the court for (i) inaccurate citations, (ii) incomplete or misleading statements regarding evidence, and (iii) citing opinions for conclusions NOT supported by the actual opinion in that case. Competent, ethical lawyers (yes, there are still a few – fewer than there used to be, unfortunately). She was ABSOLUTELY responsible for the contents of that pleading, once she signed it.
Now, she COULD have replied, “I don’t remember, as I am sitting here, the specific definition we were using in that case. I can research it, if you like, and respond in writing. I can tell you that, today, my definition of “assault weapon” would be [insert whatever brainless, Leftist idiocy].” But she clearly did NOT want to be pinned down to a definition, because she knew that if she gave ANY definition acceptable to the lunatic, anti-gun Left, Kennedy would have fileted her like a trout. She is a liar, inept, and incapable for the level of analysis any rational person would expect of a judge.
“Its judges like this, people like this, that make ya think wistfully about assaulting them with some kind of weapon.”
As my mother used to say, “some people talk just to hear their head rattle!”