In yet another middle finger in the face of justice, a federal judge handed down a mere eight-year sentence for Nicholas Roske for the attempted assassination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh in the weeks leading up to the Dobbs decision in 2022. Judge Deborah Boardman didn’t even attempt to find a middle ground between the prosecution’s request of 30 years and the defense’s plea for eight. In such a high-profile case, the attempted murder of a Supreme Court justice, this sentence is a slap on the wrist at best and a miscarriage of justice at worst.
But according to Judge Boardman, there were “mitigating factors.” Because with a liberal, female judge, there are always “mitigating factors,” no matter how heinous the crime.
One of these “mitigating factors” was that Roske “spontaneously confessed to and cooperated with police.” That would be fine if this were just someone walking around the corner to burgle a house. But, no, this was after Roske flew all the way from California to Virginia and took a taxi to Kavanaugh’s address, armed with a pistol, knife, lock-picking set, duct tape, hammer, crowbar, and tactical gear. This was after weeks of him searching online for information about the justices, mass shooters, and how to harm people, as stated in the government’s sentencing memo:
The defendant’s criminal conduct — the Attempted Assassination of a Justice of the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 351© — required extensive premeditation. The defendant researched; planned; procured the tools for the planned killings; traveled across the entirety of the country with those tools, including a gun; and attempted to delete online evidence of motive and intent.
Not to mention that he admitted he was going there specifically to kill Kavanaugh. As the prosecutor argued, his “goal explicitly was both to alter the outcome of a pending Supreme Court case, a consequential case,” and “to change the composition of the court for decades to come.”
The fact that Roske called 9-1-1 and turned himself in is a relief, but to focus solely on that and overlook all the other incriminating factors is a form of malfeasance. He only did that after he saw U.S. Marshals outside Kavanaugh’s home. Until then, he intended to murder a Supreme Court justice, and that carries a maximum sentence of life in prison, which is why eight is a joke. The justices have faced increasing death threats in recent years, which strongly implies the need to deter such behavior. The prosecutor brought up the fact that Kavanaugh had received a death threat in April from someone who invoked Roske’s name and referenced shooting the justice in the head. Do you think this person will be deterred by seeing such mild sentences being handed down?
Another “mitigating factor” cited by the judge is far worse. Fox News reports, “During the hearing, Boardman referred to Roske as a transgender woman, and Roske’s attorneys told the court recently that while their client’s legal name is Nicholas, Roske goes by the name Sophie and uses female pronouns.”
I do take offense, by the way, because he is using my name when he’s not a woman.
It’s not bad enough that we have liberal judges who don’t know what justice is, but now we have sitting judges who believe biologically false fairytales. There can be no law and order if the ones passing judgment follow falsehoods instead of facts.
Fox continues, “Boardman, a Biden appointee, said she factored into the sentence her concern about Trump’s executive order requiring transgender inmates to be detained in prisons that correspond to their sex at birth.” Let me get this straight: She’s concerned that a man who’s been a man his whole life up until five minutes ago — a man who wanted to kill someone — is going to feel awkward in a male prison. All of a sudden, he’s a woman, and so being locked up in a prison with men is a problem, and therefore, he should have a lighter sentence? It makes no sense.
The judge’s thinking is also illogical in light of the string of trans violence that has terrorized the country in recent years. The “trans community” has made its hate evident not only in words but in actions. The Covenant School shooting, the Annunciation School shooting, and the Charlie Kirk shooting, just to name a few of the more recent and prominent examples. For a judge to then say, Oh, you’re trans, so I’m going to give you a lighter sentence and let you out of jail sooner, is in complete opposition to the facts and real events of trans violence.
The fact that Roske’s attorneys admitted that he began transitioning before the attack should not only have given the judge pause, but also provided more evidence for the fact that this was a dangerous person who should be locked up for a long time.
This comes as no surprise, though, when you consider Boardman’s track record and reason for being nominated in the first place. According to her nomination files, she “is the daughter of the American Revolution on her father’s side and a first-generation American of Palestinian descent on her mother’s side.” Joe Biden’s White House celebrated her nomination as a reflection of American diversity, also known as a DEI hire.
The Federalist’s Matt Kittle notes, “Boardman has, like many of her fellow left-leaning federal district court judges, ruled multiple times against President Trump’s agenda. In August, she ruled that the administration cannot end so-called ‘birthright citizenship’ for anchor babies born to illegal immigrants. The order butted up against a U.S. Supreme Court opinion in June that reined in district court judges from issuing sweeping nationwide injunctions.”
In light of all that background information, it becomes clear why Judge Boardman would make comments and ask questions like this: “I have not seen evidence that the Sentencing Commission relied on evidence that it would reduce recidivism.” She continued, “Why do you think that Ms. Roske, sitting here three years later, poses a danger to the public? We can agree Ms. Roske needs intensive therapy. Will she be provided that in the Bureau of Prisons?”
I think we all know that if the shoe were on the other foot, if it were a liberal justice whose life had been threatened by a right-winger, that the whole book would be thrown at them.
The DOJ plans to appeal this appalling sentence because it is well below the sentencing guidelines, but is that enough? These activists, dressed in judicial robes, have become a blight on the judicial system and are undermining the Rule of Law from within. Our nation of laws will not survive with judges who refuse to uphold those laws.
As John Adams wisely and presciently stated, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
And as Allen West asked, “Why do we have so many judges in America who favor criminals over the rule of law?”
If we continue to elect and appoint immoral judges, we will continue to have immoral and unjust rulings like this one.
