Charges against Judge Kozinski Threaten Rare 2nd Amendment Originalist

Media knives are out for Judge Alex Kozinski. Does he deserve it? And what does it mean for gun owners? (The Washington Post/Facebook)

USA – -(Ammoland.com)- “Prominent appeals court Judge Alex Kozinski accused of sexual misconduct,” The Washington Post propagated Friday. “Heidi Bond … is one of six women — all former clerks or more junior staffers known as externs in the 9th Circuit — who alleged to The Washington Post in recent weeks that Kozinski, now 67 and still serving as a judge on the court, subjected them to a range of inappropriate sexual conduct or comments. She is one of two former clerks who said Kozinski asked them to view porn in his chambers.”

If true, that’s inexcusable. But without evidence, this is another “he said/she said years later” example of a hysteria sweeping the country. The trend has been increasingly devolving into witch hints and blurring of lines between actual sexual abuse and allegations made to advance personal motives and political agendas. And as much as we’re urged to always believe the victim (unless she’s one of Bill Clinton’s accusers), false accusations do happen, potentially destroying the lives of the accused and also making it harder for real victims to obtain justice.

“I would never intentionally do anything to offend anyone and it is regrettable that a handful have been offended by something I may have said or done,” Kozinski responded. “I don’t remember ever showing pornographic material to my clerks. If this is all they are able to dredge up after 35 years, I am not too worried.”

By “they” he’s referring to people opposed to his position on the federal bench for reasons of judicial and political differences and motives. And as long as Kozinski is being scrutinized, fairness demands his accusers be examined as well, if for no other reason than to invalidate countercharges against them.

That’s why it’s curious The Post failed to mention main accuser Heidi Bond, now writing romance novels under the pen name Courtney Milan, is supporting Democrat Doug Jones for the Senate and talked about writing a modern-day romance novel where “The heroine’s mother is an immigration activist.” That suggests “progressive” sympathies, and it would be appropriate to determine those for all accusers – not to automatically invalidate their claims, but certainly as information that deserves to at least be considered in the mix.

Likewise, one man’s porno is another’s federally-funded art exhibit. Americans routinely watch stuff on HBO and Netflix that many would consider obscene. To paraphrase Whoopi Goldberg’s “rape-rape” gaffe, are we talking “pornography-pornography” here, or something considerably less hard core?

Not to excuse any of that. One would think, especially in this day and age, every professional would be situationally aware and just plain moral enough not to behave like an intimidating lout. The question here is, do the alleged offenses, if they happened as described, rise to the level of disqualifying Judge Kozinski’s continued presence on the bench?

And who thinks that’s not what WaPo and other media sharks circling and smelling blood in the water have in mind?

Were he to resign or worse, be booted, one group that would suffer a big loss is gun owners. Because even though the 9th Circuit has been notoriously anti-gun in its rulings, Kozinski has been a refreshing voice of departure from the majority, one who understands founding intent on the Second Amendment both literally and viscerally.

From his dissent in Silveira v. Lockyer, a challenge to California’s “assault weapons” ban that the Supreme Court refused to take on:

“My excellent colleagues have forgotten these bitter lessons of history. The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once.

“Fortunately, the Framers were wise enough to entrench the right of the people to keep and bear arms within our constitutional structure. The purpose and importance of that right was still fresh in their minds, and they spelled it out clearly so it would not be forgotten. Despite the panel’s mighty struggle to erase these words, they remain, and the people themselves can read what they say plainly enough:

“’A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’”

If Judge Kozinski is now a target, it’s in the interests of gun owners to make sure that allegations are true, have been faithfully recounted, are unmotivated by agenda, and are egregious enough to warrant further actions. But regardless, just by being named and associated with such behavior, we’ll probably never see his name added to President Donald Trump’s list of potential Supreme Court candidates. After reading his stirring defense of the Second Amendment, that alone is a major loss.

Dec. 18 Update:

“Alex Kozinski, a high-profile federal court judge in California, is retiring after multiple women accused him of sexual harassment, prompting a formal inquiry.”


About David Codrea:David Codrea

David Codrea is the winner of multiple journalist awards for investigating / defending the RKBA and a long-time gun owner rights advocate who defiantly challenges the folly of citizen disarmament.

In addition to being a field editor/columnist at GUNS Magazine and associate editor for Oath Keepers, he blogs at “The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance,” and posts on Twitter: @dcodrea and Facebook.

  • 31 thoughts on “Charges against Judge Kozinski Threaten Rare 2nd Amendment Originalist

    1. Author: Wild Bill
      Comment:
      @Ed, If all you read was Heller then you are remiss in your research and that explains why you have come to an improper conclusion. Please see US v Miller. Where is the Relevator when one needs him?

      Re US v Miller, above mentioned,I wonder as to the following. Miller was unrepresented before the Supreme Court, where according to some accounts the attorney for the government flat out lied. Letting that possibility pass, letting historical fact, which The Court seemed mysteriously unaware of pass too, what would happen if that case were heard today.. Would Miller have been furnished an attorney to argue his cause before the court, which would have greatly benefited from hearing objections to the governments arguments, which along with the presentation of historical fact might well have led the court to rule otherwise. One wonders.

    2. It is clear that women have discovered a new and powerful weapon at their disposal. It has crossed political lines (at least in my home town in California) and is proving to be the tool of choice not just for women to use against men or liberals against conservatives but against anyone who could possibly have any reaction of any kind to amything. The result is the destruction of someone’s carreer, livelihood, marriage….the possibilities are endless. Now watch us tear ourselves apart.

      1. I wonder as to how long it will be before society tires of these seemingly endless complaints, some of which are legitimate, and says to hell with it?

    3. Defamation of character should be punishable by jail time. It has become far too easy to tarnish someone’s reputation and character.

      1. Reading Heller and the SCts refusal to review state laws banning assault rifles (spare me the quibbles about definitions, they’re meainingless) it is clear that, outside the home, possession of a loaded firearm is now a privilege. I manage to go to the grocery regularly without being armed, but then I’m not a coward with a John Wayne complex.

        1. @Ed, If all you read was Heller then you are remiss in your research and that explains why you have come to an improper conclusion. Please see US v Miller. Where is the Relevator when one needs him?

      2. “But without evidence . . . .” ?

        Without evidence? Since when are accusations by eyewitnesses not evidence admissible in any court of law, federal or state? I admired this guy (for reasons other than his Second Amendment jurisprudence), but the accounts make it clear he brought this on himself and got what he deserved. Not a close call.

    4. This is the modern day version of the Salem witch trials. Only difference is so far no one has been killed they have just had their career and reputations destroyed.

        1. Never said they didnt. My point is people are being convicted in the press with nothing but an accusation. If someone has been proven guilty fine but what about the people who lose everything to a made up accusation? Once someone is labeled in the press it’s impossible to undo the damage. Witches don’t exist but that didn’t stop the mob from burning a bunch of people at the stake anyway. Just because abusers exist doesn’t mean it’s ok if in the process of finding them we burn people based on accusations alone

    5. Once we allowed them to throw out God and morality we lost anything resembling freedom or justice. We now live in a fantasy world of guilty by accusation. It is truly a sad day when the left have “progressed” us to the point of insanity.

    6. The left has found a way to get rid of anyone they don’t like or who is not in lock step with them. If a woman is subjected to what these women claim they were subjected to and they wait 10, 20, 30 years to complain, it should be ignored. Maybe they wanted him to come on to them and when he didn’t do it they seek revenge. I have had that happen to me in my Church no less. A women in the Choir came onto me and I did everything I could to discourage her and nothing worked, until I came right out and said leave me alone I’m not interested. She then started a campaign to destroy me in the church and among my friends there. This went on for 3-4 years until she finally found a boy friend and moved away.

      1. The left did not invent sexual assault and sexual harassment. How about men growing some balls and holding themselves accountable?

    7. So far as can be told, what we have here are unsubstianted, unproven accusations, which do not strike me as anything a one person should be hung out to dry over, absent proof, strange as such a requirement might seem. Judge Kazinsky has been accused of improprieties. His accusers should be required to prove their claims. Oh by the way, the following situation might be of interest too. Let’s suppose that some woman or women are attracted to a man, who for one reason or another is uninterested. People can be strange and these women, business associates or subordinates are unwilling to take a polite no for an answer, so the man complains as women are doing. Will there be the same rush to judgement when a man is the aggrieved party? One wonders.

    8. Here is the problem. Women want to be treated the same as men until it doesn’t benefit them. If you don’t like something speak up about it. If you do and it still happens you can take it a step further. Hearing a dirty joke is way different than having your job threatened if you don’t date or have sex with the boss or if he touches you. We are getting to the point that anything that is mildly uncomfortable is grounds for ruining someone career. I bet these same woman read books,watch movies,t.v. and would go see a comic that are all way more crude without a second thought. Since its in the work place something they would have no problem with in their personal life is now held up as a traumatic experience and sometimes as a way to enrich oneself financially or in their career.
      There is no excuse for harassment but men and women are different and there needs to be room for both to be different if they are going to be able to work together. If something bothers you and you can’t ignore it or shrug it off then say something. You can’t complain you didn’t like something if you don’t make it known to anyone. You don’t come back to a restaurant years later and ask for a refund for the steak that wasn’t cooked right 4yrs and 3 chefs ago. If you do voice your concerns and it continues then it needs to be addressed. People seem to be getting way to thin skinned lately and if it doesn’t get better we are going to end up with men and women working seperatly or people being so worried about them working together that it affects who they hire.

    9. I’m not buying it.

      worked on federal government contracts from high school to retirement. Starting in the late 70s, we had mandatory annual sexual harassment training. I had to do a lawyer like thing, explaining that thee was no sexual interest intended or implied to give my female gardener coworker flowers found out in the desert.

      You could be fired for sexually harassing Antoinette if Gwen did not like the way you talked to Antoinette. Antoinette likes it, Gwen is a psycho control freak who can’t control you, and you’re fired for no legitimate reason.

      They could have handled the alleged problem when it allegedly happened. Accusations of sexual harassment follow witch hunt rules: guilty until proven innocent.

      Nobody said nothing about Bill Crosby until he left the plantation and said pull your pants up, turn your hat around the right way and get a job.

    10. It is time to take the accuser and the dirty media to task in the court to determine who is lying.Judge Moore’s wife said she was going to sue and I hope she does. Maybe, some of these women used their appearance to their advantage by trying to get promoted and when that didn’t work they got mad and retaliated. Some are just looking for their moment of fame. There are actual infringements like Frankenstein and Conyers but I don’t know the wide spread accusations are accurate. Just an additional mess to tear the country apart. Soros is probably laughing his @ss of with all the lives he is ruining. It would be a real benefit if he would laugh himself into a fatal heart attack or go ahead and die of AIDS which he deserves.

    11. Here is an interesting thought. The 2nd amendment is the only part of the constitution that uses the very clear language of “…shall not be infringed.” My thought is that any law regulating firearm ownership and possession is an infringement. I also take that one step further. Ant attempt to remove the 2nd amendment in itself is an infringement and therefore unconstitutional in itself. Our forefathers were so adamant about that right that they wrote into the constitution those very clear and mandatory words or “Shall” and “Infringed”. Very clearly they never wanted that right removed for the protection of the citizens and their freedom.

    12. The Democrats have found a new tool in which to dismember an opponent. They will slander them with false or inflated allegations that can not be proven but will leave their victim in a defensive posture. This must be stopped or else we will enter the modern day equivalent of the medieval inquisition.

      1. Absolutely. If you can’t win in the voting booth, simply make accusations and get rid of the candidate before the election. It worked for Uncle Adolf, Uncle Joseph, Grandpa Marx, Cousin Mao, and others.

        If the victim has nothing to worry about, the accusers should be sued. If they can not PROVE their cases, they deserve what they get.

    13. This sudden “uprising” of women accusing men of inappropriate sexual innuendos and otherwise is the dealings of George Soros & Co. It is the continuation of liberal/democrat/feminists/communists trying to destroy this country – the last bastion of freedom. Soros was a Nazi conspirator handing over fellow Jews in Hungry to the SS to save his own skin. He has been the “behind-the-scenes” financial contributor to the following groups: Occupy Wall Street, Black Lives Matter, & Antifa. He is behind the “MeToo” feminist group taking down men in high places. No doubt a few like Weinstein, Weiner and others are guilty. However, when accusations are made, whether true or not, it destroys the accused in all manners. The sheeple don’t care if they are true, they want “justice”. What used to pass as innocent play has now become “offensive” and worse yet, criminal. The communists are “winning” because most people are asleep-at-the-wheel and are too ignorant to know better. We have treasonous politicians getting away with “murder” all because Bill Clinton asked for a legal definition of the word “is’ and more.

      1. Well you won’t find someone who thinks GS is a bigger jackass than me, nor should he control something like $8B in wealth with his Left Wing ideas, but get the facts right … he was 10-14 years of age at the height of WW2, and it is highly unlikely that he was some sort of dark, sinister Nazi co-conspirator at that early age. Did he do whatever was necessary to survive a difficult time … I have no doubt he did that.

      1. RobJ, while McCarthyism is used as a disparaging term these days, and has been for many years, one thing that most forget to mention is:

        McCarthy was RIGHT. There were and still are communists in most if not all government agencies. His tactics were deplorable, but who did he say was a communist that turned out not to BE a communist?

      1. @Herb T, Yes, that is correct. They kill our careers, so that we will not have a platform from which to speak. The liberal/socialist/progressives have learned that they, through their co- conspirators in the main stream media, can negate us by mere accusations and just plain lies. We must stop caring what the snowflakes think. We must be as hard and conscienceless as the socialists. The consequences are too great not to.

      2. @Herb, I see that I forgot to mention that due process and innocent until proved guilty are in the courtroom. Trial in the press includes neither of those safeguards. And there is the NYTimes v. Sullivan decision that protects the msm.
        So it is impossible to defend one’s self.

    Leave a Comment 31 Comments

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *