Holding up the past

Should Supreme Court nominees be held accountable for (acts committed during) their teenage years? And if so, can it be politicized as a witch hunt? Depending on the acts committed, the answer in the first case is a big “Yes” and a “No” in the second case. Considering that the Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been accused of groping in a drunken state at a school party in early 1980 by one of his classmates who has come forward openly and has said that in his aggression, she feared for her life and is ready to testify in public. This allegation in itself is a big red flag for Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination.

One has to keep in mind that this is not a teenage prank, a minor infraction or sheer stupidity, but is a serious act that could have been construed as a crime had it not been for his being underage.

It doesn’t matter if the nomination has been put forth by Republicans or Democrats, it’s about the integrity of Supreme Court justices who are bestowed with a lifetime tenure and are expected to demonstrate and adhere to the highest standards of ethics, code of conduct and morality in past, present and future. And that precisely clouds the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh in the light of these serious allegations. I hope the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee rise above their

party affiliations and uphold their oath in defending the sanctity of the United States Constitution — first and foremost. —Atul M. Karnik, Woodside, N.Y.