Law Justice Brett Kavanaugh Megathread - Megathread for Brett Kavanaugh, US Supreme Court Justice

they're good justices, brentt

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/05/trump-picks-brett-kavanaugh-for-supreme-court.html

President Donald Trump has picked Brett Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge with extensive legal credentials and a lengthy political record, to succeed Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the Supreme Court, NBC News reported.

Kavanaugh, 53, is an ideological conservative who is expected to push the court to the right on a number of issues including business regulation and national security. The favorite of White House Counsel Donald McGahn, Kavanaugh is also considered a safer pick than some of the more partisan choices who were on the president’s shortlist.

A graduate of Yale Law School who serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Kavanaugh has the traditional trappings of a presidential nominee to the high court.


If confirmed, the appellate judge would become the second young, conservative jurist Trump has put on the top U.S. court during his first term. Kavanaugh's confirmation would give the president an even bigger role in shaping U.S. policy for decades to come. The potential to morph the federal judiciary led many conservatives to support Trump in 2016, and he has not disappointed so far with the confirmation of conservative Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch and numerous federal judges.

At times, he has diverged from the Republican party’s ideological line on important cases that have come before him, including on the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 health care law which Kavanaugh has declined to strike down on a number of occasions in which it has come before him.

Anti-abortion groups quietly lobbied against Kavanaugh, pushing instead for another jurist on Trump’s shortlist, 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Amy Coney Barrett, ABC News reported in the run-up to Trump’s announcement.

Kavanaugh received his current appointment in 2006 after five years in the George W. Bush administration, where he served in a number of roles including staff secretary to the president. He has been criticized for his attachment to Bush, as well as his involvement in a number of high-profile legal cases.

For instance, Kavanaugh led the investigation into the death of Bill Clinton’s Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster, and assisted in Kenneth Starr’s 1998 report outlining the case for Clinton’s impeachment.

Democrats criticized Kavanaugh’s political roles during his 2006 confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“Your experience has been most notable, not so much for your blue chip credentials, but for the undeniably political nature of so many of your assignments,” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said at the time.

“From the notorious Starr report, to the Florida recount, to the President’s secrecy and privilege claims, to post-9/11 legislative battles including the Victims Compensation Fund, to ideological judicial nomination fights, if there has been a partisan political fight that needed a very bright legal foot soldier in the last decade, Brett Kavanaugh was probably there,” Schumer said.

Kavanaugh's work on the Starr report has been scrutinized by Republicans who have said it could pose trouble for the president as he negotiates with special counsel Robert Mueller over the terms of a possible interview related to Mueller's Russia probe. The 1998 document found that Clinton's multiple refusals to testify to a grand jury in connection with Starr's investigation were grounds for impeachment.

In later years, Kavanaugh said that Clinton should not have had to face down an investigation during his presidency. He has said the indictment of a president would not serve the public interest.

Like Trump's first nominee to the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh clerked for Kennedy. If he is confirmed, it will mark the first time ever that a current or former Supreme Court justice has two former clerks become justices, according to an article by Adam Feldman, who writes a blog about the Supreme Court.

Kavanaugh teaches courses on the separation of powers, the Supreme Court, and national security at Harvard Law School and Yale Law School, and does charitable work at St. Maria’s Meals program at Catholic Charities in Washington, D.C., according to his official biography.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ett-kavanaugh-nomination-by-a-28-point-margin

After a blistering confirmation battle, Justice Brett Kavanaugh will take his seat for oral arguments on the U.S. Supreme Court with a skeptical public, a majority of which opposed his nomination. However, Democrats may not be able to exploit this fact in the upcoming elections as much as they hope, because the independent voters overwhelmingly disapprove of their own handling of the nomination by a 28-point margin, a new CNN/SSRS poll finds.

Overall, just 41 percent of those polled said they wanted to see Kavanaugh confirmed, compared to 51 percent who said they opposed his confirmation. In previous CNN polls dating back to Robert Bork in 1987, no nominee has been more deeply underwater.

What's interesting, however, is even though Democrats on the surface would seem to have public opinion on their side, just 36 percent approved of how they handled the nomination, compared to 56 percent who disapproved. (Republicans were at 55 percent disapproval and 35 percent approval). A further breakdown finds that 58 percent of independents disapproved of the way the Democrats handled the nomination — compared to 30 percent who approved. (Independents also disapproved of Republicans handling of the matter, but by a narrower 53 percent to 32 percent margin).

Many people have strong opinions on the way the Kavanaugh nomination will play out in November and who it will benefit. The conventional wisdom is that it will help Democrats in the House, where there are a number of vulnerable Republicans in suburban districts where losses among educated women could be devastating, and that it will help Republicans in the Senate, where the tossup races are in red states where Trump and Kavanaugh are more popular.

That said, it's clear that the nomination energized both sides, and that the tactics pursued by the parties turned off independent voters in a way that makes it much harder to predict how this will end up affecting election outcomes.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Was this post written November 2, 2016?
It feels like time is looping into itself at this point.
Now imagine the Insanity that will ensue once trump is no longer in office and the Dems, whipped up into this endless fury, have reign once again.
>Implying that this will happen within the next decade century
Place your bets, which will draw more salt:
1. RBG keeling over before the next election
2. Red wave
3. 2020 Trumpenreich
4. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg dying during a Red Wave in the wake of Donald John Trump Senior's reelection to the office of President of the United States of America.
You should have walked far away from that conversation the second they mentioned the muh Russian collusion. You'll never hear anything of value from anyone that still takes a two year nothingburger seriously
I can tell you that that's true from direct experience.
 
It should be noted that Kavanaugh does not believe 100% that a sitting president cannot be indicted for crimes. Rather, he believes it would not be a good idea for him to be indicted while serving. Presidents should be allowed lots of room to act as they please, and any indictments should come after they've left office.

He thinks impeachment is a good enough solution if time is of the essence.

Kavanaugh thinks that congress should pass a law extending the statute of limitations for presidents, to make his ideal recommendation explicit.

Outside of that personal opinion, it's very questionable among most legal scholars whether presidents can be indicted in the first place. Kavanaugh has his personal opinion, and then he generally follows the existing standard advice on the subject.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...he-president-is-immune-from-criminal-charges/ https://archive.is/V7nMh
https://reason.com/volokh/2018/07/09/justice-kavanaugh

Thank you for this. See, had my discussion had been more like this, I would respect what the person's concerns were. Instead, the person was basically like "Doomsday is near, because Trump. REEEEE!"

I can completely understand AND respect the person's concerns had this information been brought to my attention like this. This is why civil conversation is so important.
 
I still found hilarious that they actually believe the Muslim ban and the enforcement of immigration law is something so apocaliptic that they need to screech about it, unless they want to be cultural enriched like Europe

Most of the lefties I've seen online think the stuff going on in Europe is just a conspiracy theory.
 
For all the libshit :autism: in regards to muh abortion, I don't think repealing Roe v. Wade is necessary. It would be far easier, effective and funnier to simply strip away the nonprofit statuses of Planned Parenthood and every other baby butchering "NGO" in existence. The Dems biggest fear inst that repealing Rv.W would limit access to abortions, its that repealing the ruling would limit their ability to fundraise. Astroturfing isn't cheap, and they're already having trouble making ends meet now that public sector unions can't force anyone their members to pay their dues.
 
Handmaids - or as I like to call it, lame ass libtard cosplay.

Amazons remake of Atwood’s book has just made me hate it more; it’s got the left wing ladies all freaked out about a terrifying world that isn’t coming... but one they’ve been convinced is just around the corner. Thanks Amazon.

Why is it I have the suspicion that Schumer’s obnoxious comedian cousin had a hand in this? General dickery seems to be her forte.
 
For all the libshit :autism: in regards to muh abortion, I don't think repealing Roe v. Wade is necessary.

I don't believe abortion should be an option. It should be required for the majority of the subhumans intent on tearing apart our welfare state with endless children from different fathers warming cots in prison. I suppose with a license of some kind we might allow them to bear, but after the first three abortions we go straight to sterilization.
 
Last edited:
The thing is that Roe vs. Wade being repealed doesn't matter. What matters is abortion rights have been easily chipped away for years and years in the midwest and the south, places where white, East-Coast Democrats don't care about. They make laws where they define the exact dimensions of abortion clinics and shit, forcing them to go out of business. Conservatives have long since figured out the way to stop abortion was simply to regulate the ever-living fuck out of it on the state level.

The Supreme Court is the last place you'd go to fight for abortion. Its right there in the states and local governments.
 
They're reeeeing because they don't have the votes to stop his confirmation, this is just an assembly-wide temper tantrum, and they KNOW they can't stop it, they're just determined to make a zoo out of it in hopes it somehow hurts Trump. The only way it doesn't go through is you get an R to defect and screw their own party for petty revenge over something, and the one most likely to do that just got put in the ground
 
They're reeeeing because they don't have the votes to stop his confirmation, this is just an assembly-wide temper tantrum, and they KNOW they can't stop it, they're just determined to make a zoo out of it in hopes it somehow hurts Trump. The only way it doesn't go through is you get an R to defect and screw their own party for petty revenge over something, and the one most likely to do that just got put in the ground

Even he would probably vote yes on Kavanaugh as he is really a pretty solid replacement for Kennedy scope wise if a bit more textualist/originalist. There's nothing extreme or wrong about Kavanaugh that even a virtue signaling RINO could take issue with without seriously taking the mask off. I wouldn't be surprised if a few dems in red states voted yes too.
 
fb55fe497404732367253fcc2e754341.png

8013055c4b8a37cee315b3cc53a50aec.png
50fb67af60cf0623ad5303629d35acb8.jpg
0f940bdd1f1f563f04d90b617c3d40ad.png
a71eb5f1756a898b2a28d235cb39e65d.png
ebc0f6546be07dd81b8c0816717145dd.png
95c2b7abd421fcee8ecbd09a9cfdf3ee.png
3e1eb2987a91f5f023559305b8e43be8.png
204bc21a68cfcdc3bd4a68db32df6f74.png
a69fbbffe9f7e17b7d9c1fd022c0eb6b.png
8e00781cfae6c1f4fd8d034068a69559.png
8b5ce89dc59d97613cbc6ad7517527b8.png
02485000a0a29e82e212a531668a2ad0.png
dfec0ebf0715a3a3c597af221bbee964.png
148b9b4a38c77b417e71a54b2cf52ff7.png
13529fdf669b6d4f7d8a9dcee8724a9c.png
ac82d66f903bda21b7476ab742131e9b.png
3441dd8663f9995a22ea0099a063fe57.png

So were they just incapable of finding even a single protestor that didn't look like they came from some meth-granola hippie camp in California? I've rummaged through a decent chunk of all the protestors who stood up to start screaming and every single one of them looks exactly like you'd expect them to look. That woman in the lime-green shirt read Harry Potter so many times that she became a Harry Potter character, for fuck's sake.
 
Last edited:
For all the libshit :autism: in regards to muh abortion, I don't think repealing Roe v. Wade is necessary. It would be far easier, effective and funnier to simply strip away the nonprofit statuses of Planned Parenthood and every other baby butchering "NGO" in existence. The Dems biggest fear inst that repealing Rv.W would limit access to abortions, its that repealing the ruling would limit their ability to fundraise. Astroturfing isn't cheap, and they're already having trouble making ends meet now that public sector unions can't force anyone their members to pay their dues.

I would think Roe v. Wade is fairly safe with Kavanaugh, but I'd like to see a staunch conservative court challenge the case that all this "right to privacy" for pozzed causes only (for some reason) is built on, Griswold v. Connecticut. That is one of the most egregious case decisions IMO and it was basically ruled that 'well we can't search peoples homes, so I guess they can do what they want there.' Of course, this doesn't apply to anything but birth control, abortion, and being LGBT for some reason... I also think it is more likely to be overturned, which in turn would set precedent to overturn Roe v. Wade and a host of other (IMO) poorly reasoned decisions. I know this is wildly optimistic. It would have the added benefit of making catladys think the sky was falling too
 
I would think Roe v. Wade is fairly safe with Kavanaugh, but I'd like to see a staunch conservative court challenge the case that all this "right to privacy" for pozzed causes only (for some reason) is built on, Griswold v. Connecticut. That is one of the most egregious case decisions IMO and it was basically ruled that 'well we can't search peoples homes, so I guess they can do what they want there.' Of course, this doesn't apply to anything but birth control, abortion, and being LGBT for some reason... I also think it is more likely to be overturned, which in turn would set precedent to overturn Roe v. Wade and a host of other (IMO) poorly reasoned decisions. I know this is wildly optimistic. It would have the added benefit of making catladys think the sky was falling too

I would love nothing more than to see SCOTUS + Kavanaugh repeal New York Times Co. v. Sullivan. That alone would destroy our perpetually worthless Western media overnight.
 
The thing is that Roe vs. Wade being repealed doesn't matter. What matters is abortion rights have been easily chipped away for years and years in the midwest and the south, places where white, East-Coast Democrats don't care about. They make laws where they define the exact dimensions of abortion clinics and shit, forcing them to go out of business. Conservatives have long since figured out the way to stop abortion was simply to regulate the ever-living fuck out of it on the state level.

The Supreme Court is the last place you'd go to fight for abortion. Its right there in the states and local governments.
I'm not sure people understand what repealing Roe v. Wade would do. I think they think it just makes abortions illegal immediately. No Democrats are interested in correcting this misconception because it riles people up.

I got tired of this during Obama when every year or so friends would circulate hysterical warnings about some bill that was supposedly going to cripple Planned Parenthood, so please give money and sign the petition now. Obviously none of them would do anything, because they could not make it past the House/Senate/Obama.
Planned Parenthood spends a bunch of money on troon causes. Why? What do troons have to do with pregnancy? If they're so worried about losing funding why are they throwing money at random trannies?
 
I'm not sure people understand what repealing Roe v. Wade would do. I think they think it just makes abortions illegal immediately. No Democrats are interested in correcting this misconception because it riles people up.

I got tired of this during Obama when every year or so friends would circulate hysterical warnings about some bill that was supposedly going to cripple Planned Parenthood, so please give money and sign the petition now. Obviously none of them would do anything, because they could not make it past the House/Senate/Obama.
Planned Parenthood spends a bunch of money on troon causes. Why? What do troons have to do with pregnancy? If they're so worried about losing funding why are they throwing money at random trannies?

Planned Parenthood is kind of a scheme for the Dems to funnel gov money back to their war chests tbh. I imagine that is part of the battle surrounding it. Of course repealing Roe v. Wade (not a real Kavanaugh position) wouldn't do anything to Planned Parenthood really, and blue state abortions would go on as planned
 
Back