Supreme Court Nominee’s Aide Responsible for Wikipedia Tampering

A former clerk of the frontrunner Supreme Court nominee for the new vacancy edited the Wikipedia page of her boss and her potential competitors. She did this to make her boss look good and her opposition candidates look bad.

Brown’s clerk politically tampered to boost her reputation

Politico inquired about the latest changes on the Wikipedia pages of the potential Supreme Court nominee.

Upon investigation, it found that Maetto Godi, the former clerk of the possible nominee Ketanji Brown, was behind the latest changes done on Friday.

Another group of clerks for the same judge helped Politico in tracking the person and spoke on the condition of anonymity that Godi has been changing her page for several years.

According to the media group, the latest edits depict a range of patterns which indicate these changes have been made to boost Kentanji’s reputation in front of the liberal audience and lawmakers.

Likewise, the pages of the other two top runners, i.e., Michelle Childs and Leondra Kruger, were altered to make them less appealing to Democrat politicians.

While Senate confirmation of the Biden nominee could be months away, the round of edits on Wikipedia profiles depicts lobbyists are already up to shape public perception, Politico claimed.

The Wikipedia user, namely “H2rty”, who was recognized as Godi by his colleagues, started editing pages on January 28, just two days after the news of Justice Stephen Breyer’s retirement broke.

Clerk threw dust on the candidacy of other contenders

In the edits, the former clerk removed a reference to Ketanji’s position regarding a baptist school.

Similarly, the explanation of two rulings from Ketanji against the Trump administration, which was ultimately reversed by the D.C. Circuit court, was also removed.

Not only this, but the content was replaced with a defensive statement and an attack against conservatives; this mentioned many right-wing activists are trying to tarnish Ketanji’s image so that she would not be picked as the next Supreme Court justice.

The content of one of the high-profile cases which Jackson heard regarding former President Trump was also tweaked; the latest edits mentioned the D.C. court, and not Jackson, was responsible for helping Trump get away with the case.

Meanwhile, edits to the other two contenders were made to make them look like relatively weaker candidates in front of liberals.

While Childs was mentioned as an expert in employment and labor law on her page, the user added she worked for an employer who was accused of promoting racism and gender-based discrimination in America.

Similarly, Kruger’s modified page mentioned she is a swing voter in the California Supreme Court, adding that she’s moderate in some cases, which makes her not a very good fit for the U.S. Supreme Court.