A whistleblower who claims that he was tipped off to the decision in a major Supreme Court case before it was published in 2014 admitted Thursday that an incident he described in his new book "may not have" actually happened – then he was played evidence proving it did not.

During a House Judiciary Committee hearing titled, "Undue Influence: Operation Higher Court and Politicking at SCOTUS," Rev. Robert Schenck faced questions from Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, about the circumstances surrounding a separate case involving his brother Rev. Paul Schenck.

"With a single rap of the gavel, Chief Justice William Rehnquist announced: 'We'll hear argument first this morning in Number 95-1056, Reverend Paul Schenck and Dwight Saunders versus Pro-Choice Network of Western New York,'" Robert Schenck wrote in his book, as Jordan showed via placards bearing the text. "Paul and I winked at each other, knowing we had made history with 'Reverend' in his name."

Schenck explained at the hearing that it had been court practice not to include titles like reverend in the names of court cases, but that he and his brother made a point to include it due to the case having to do with religious liberty. Jordan then called the whole incident into question.

"Did Chief Justice Rehnquist really say that, the way I just read it from your book?" Jordan asked.

"Uhhhh," Schenck replied. "I can't say that I remember."

"Well, you're pretty darned specific here," Jordan said, noting that Schenck even included the...

Read Full Story: https://news.google.com/__i/rss/rd/articles/CBMijAFodHRwczovL3d3dy5mb3huZXdzL...