09-17-2018, 12:05 PM
(09-17-2018, 11:47 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've actually been wrestling with this. I tell people often that I am the poster child for male brain development continuing into the mid-20s. I made some terrible decisions when I was younger and my wife has said if she had known me back then, we probably never would have spoken. I feel like my stupid decisions did help mold me into the man I am, but mostly through owning up to my mistakes, learning from them, and moving on.
All of that being said, I would fully expect things of my youth to be drug up if I were dealing with a confirmation hearing like this. This is someone sitting on a co-equal branch of government at the highest level and I would expect something like this to be disqualifying for anyone in this type of situation. We aren't talking about him being punished for his actions. After all, he still has his lifetime appointment to the lower courts. I do think that this sort of thing is disqualifying from the position he seeks, though.
You anticipated my follow up question: if the accusers recollection of the event is 100% accurate does that disqualify him from the SC? Saying yes rather flies in the face of the entire purpose of the juvenile justice system. Also, the brain development fact is widely accepted fact, and it does not apply to men only.
