Court Papers Reveal New Details as Lawyers Seek To Toss Statements From Kavanaugh Assassination Attempt Case

New details about the case of Nicholas Roske, accused of plotting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, have been revealed in court documents as attorneys seek to have certain evidence deemed inadmissible.

At a Glance

Nicholas Roske is accused of planning to assassinate Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2022.
Roske’s attorneys argue his statements are inadmissible due to improper reading of rights.
The suspect was allegedly motivated by a leaked draft opinion on abortion rights and potential gun law changes.
Roske reportedly abandoned his plan after a conversation with his sister and called 911.
His trial is set for June, with the outcome dependent on pending legal motions.

Suspect’s Confession and Legal Challenges

New details about Nicholas Roske, the man accused of plotting to assassinate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2022, have been revealed in legal filings. Court documents show that when asked, Roske told investigators he planned to “break in” to the home of Kavanaugh, then “Shoot him and then shoot myself.” He reportedly said he was motivated by the Court’s stance on abortion and other issues, and believed he “could make the world a better place by killing him.”

Roske’s confession is a focal point of legal contention as Roske’s attorneys push to have his statements declared inadmissible in court. Roske’s legal team argues that his rights were not properly read to him during questioning. “At the time, Mr. Roske was acutely suicidal, visibly exhausted, and had repeatedly expressed his need for psychiatric care,” they wrote. The outcome of these legal motions could significantly impact the trial, which is scheduled for June.

Details emerge in plan to kill Kavanaugh: ‘Break in, shoot him and then shoot myself’ https://t.co/EgRB6m7utJ

— Robert Barnes (@robert_a_barnes) January 5, 2025

Motivations and Mental Health Concerns

Roske’s actions were reportedly motivated by a leaked draft opinion on abortion rights and potential changes to gun laws. The suspect expressed concerns over the Supreme Court’s stances and was particularly upset by the leaked draft opinion that suggested the overturning of Roe v. Wade. Additionally, Roske cited fears that Kavanaugh would support decisions loosening gun control laws, influenced by the tragic mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas.

Court documents reveal that Roske has a history of mental health issues and was due to take medication at the time of the incident. This aspect of the case raises questions about the intersection of mental health and criminal justice, adding another layer of complexity to the legal proceedings.

The Plot and Its Abandonment

According to court records, Roske traveled from California to Maryland, locating Justice Kavanaugh’s residence using online resources. He arrived armed with a pistol, ammunition, and zip ties, among other tools. These items are now subject to evidence suppression motions filed by his defense team.

Roske allegedly abandoned his plan after a conversation with his sister, and then subsequently 911 to turn himself in. This decision has become a crucial element in the case, raising questions about Roske’s state of mind and intent at the time of his arrest.

Broader Implications and Political Context

The case has highlighted issues of judicial security and political tensions surrounding Supreme Court decisions. It has also drawn attention to the Biden administration’s handling of protests at Justice Kavanaugh’s residence, which some argue violated federal law. The leaked opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which indicated the Court’s intent to overturn Roe v. Wade, sparked significant protests and ultimately led to this assassination attempt.

The Supreme Court’s inability to identify the source of the leak after a lengthy investigation has added to the controversy surrounding the case. As the trial approaches, the outcome of pending legal motions regarding evidence admissibility will be crucial in determining the course of the proceedings and potentially influencing public perception of the justice system’s handling of politically charged cases.