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:
On a scale from '1' to 'dissolution of the party', how fucked with the normies are the Democrats in the midterms after this circus?

As an akshull kiwi who's media general portrays US democrats in a positive light and constantly attacks Trump and republicans (ironically coming hot on the heels of gagging on the dick of National for 9 years) I'm hoping for dissolution. Fuck the democrats. They've done nothing but behave like spoiled hysterical children for years and the media in most countries has just let the fuckers do it.
 
Screen shot 2018-09-28 at 12.04.24 AM.png

Screen shot 2018-09-28 at 12.05.50 AM.png

Lol fucking Pokefag.
 
Just catching up finishing Ford’s speech after listening to Kavanaugh’s and not seeing much outside of what’s been posted hear as I followed the Kavanaugh hearing posts.
Holy shit, seeing what people post was insane. Literally everything was bitching about Kavanaugh being emotional in the opening statement when every part of his livelihood was tarnished. No shit he was going to be emotional, and it’s something every judge goes through when it’s very personal to them. It’s so hypocritical because it’s the equivalent of insulting Ford during her opening statement.

This is one of the biggest circuses Congress has ever seen.

ETA: the difference between Glassley and Feinstein is insane. Grassley was nothing but kind and fair to both parties while Feinstein showed nothing but animosity to Kavanaugh and full support of Ford.
 
Last edited:
Surely the democrats know that if their gambit fails and Kavanaugh gets confirmed, they're going to have three+ decades of at least one justice NEVER EVER supporting anything they try to send to the SCOTUS right?

That's the best part, this is the guy replacing the previous tie-breaker and they've gone and pissed him off beyond measure. I don't even care about abortion, but at this point I want them to overturn Roe v Wade just so Kavanaugh can write the majority opinion.
 
Surely the democrats know that if their gambit fails and Kavanaugh gets confirmed, they're going to have three+ decades of at least one justice NEVER EVER supporting anything they try to send to the SCOTUS right?
It’s no question he’ll be nominated at this point. Kavanaugh is pretty conservative but I could see him siding with the Democratic justices on a few policies here and there. They just lost their chance of getting a favorable court ruling for the next 40-50 years, even more if the Republican Party can confirm Amy Barret prior to 2020 if RBG kicks the bucket since a Republicans will likely take the senate again.
 
Why did Dr Ford send a letter to a public official accusing Kavanaugh of a felony with the expectation that she would remain anonymous? Does she think we all live under a totalitarian regime that let's people anonymously denounce each other for ideological crimes?

Or did she forget that we actually live in a society which criminal justice system is founded upon on the idea that someone has the right to face their accuser? Seriously I want to know the fucked logic that fueled her decisions.
 
Why did Dr Ford send a letter to a public official accusing Kavanaugh of a felony with the expectation that she would remain anonymous? Does she think we all live under a totalitarian regime that let's people anonymously denounce each other for ideological crimes?

Or did she forget that we actually live in a society which criminal justice system is founded upon on the idea that someone has the right to face their accuser? Seriously I want to know the fucked logic that fueled her decisions.

Perhaps banking on the #metoo wave and the sure fact that because Kavanaugh went to an expensive school and is white there would be a torrent of other accusations amidst which hers would not need to be vetted in detail.
 
Perhaps banking on the #metoo wave and the sure fact that because Kavanaugh went to an expensive school and is white there would be a torrent of other accusations amidst which hers would not need to be vetted in detail.

This #metoo shit needs to be thoroughly discredited and defeated as a tactic if people are going to quit trying to make an end run around innocent until proven guilty, because otherwise it provides a far too easy temptation to toss out a rape accusation and relying on the expected outrage to shield oneself from having to prove it.
 
I watched the whole Kavanaugh hearing yesterday, although I missed Ford's hearing. I don't want to go to work today, I just want to watch more partisan shit-flinging.
 
https://www.wired.com/story/blasey-ford-kavanaugh-filter-bubbles/

AMERICA WATCHED CHRISTINE Blasey Ford and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh testify before Congress today. The country listened as they relayed their accounts of what happened 35 years ago, when she says he sexually assaulted her at a house party, and he says neither the party nor the assault occurred. But while viewers may have watched the same hearing, they did not interpret it through a neutral conduit. Whether you followed along with a news outlet’s livestream or liveblog, watched the event on cable news, or relied on Twitter to curate a highlight reel, your experience was mediated and shaped by the filter bubbles that dictate whose opinions you see when you read things on the web. Where some see sober, science-backed credibility, other see a circus. It’s a story that’s all too typical in this period of political polarization.

If you are liberal—and in this political climate, we’re calling readers of The New York Times, The Washington Post, and CNN liberals—you went on the internet this morning and saw a flood of #BelieveWomen tweets and women talking about how Blasey Ford’s testimony moved them to tears. Or maybe you saw The New York Times’, CNN’s, or BuzzFeed’s coverage of the tearful morning. As the day went on, that constellation of publications trumpeted Blasey Ford’s credibility—both The Atlantic and the Times pointed to Blasey Ford’s scientific background as being a particular asset to her testimony—and highlighted how painful the account was for Blasey Ford as well. You may have also read that the Republican’s prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell, is known for her evenhanded treatment of sex crimes cases and that the (all-white-male-Republican side’s reliance on an outside investigator reflects poorly on them.

Another key liberal theme of the day is the behavior of conservatives. CNN emphasized that one-time Republican tresidential candidate Rick Santorum said that Blasey Ford is “not lying,” and The Washington Post devoted an entire article to Fox News’ Chris Wallace talking about how Blasey Ford’s testimony prompted his own daughters to speak out and why it would be “a big mistake” to disregard her story. You may have also read about more disturbing behavior: Senator Orrin Hatch calling Blasey Ford “a good, attractive witness,” former Trump campaign aide Michael Caputo having a “meltdown” on CNN, and Senator Lindsay Graham’s “meltdown” about feeling “ambushed” and telling Democrats to “watch out for your nominees.” If you lean further left, words like “embarrassment” and “cruel” came to characterize the proceedings, and the machinations of ultraconservative commentators became stories in their own right. In this bubble, truth and progressive politics won the day.

But if you are conservative, you went on the internet today and saw a deluge of #BackBrett tweets, a great deal about flying, and a lot of lamenting. Fox News' Stuart Varney and Chris Wallace both pointed a finger at Rachel Mitchell for doing a poor job as a GOP intermediary—Wallace called the testimony as directed by Mitchell “a disaster for Republicans” and Varney wondered why Blasey Ford was being treated with “absolute maximum caution” in the first place. The other conservative talking points have come from the small discrepancies Mitchell was able to find in Blasey Ford’s testimony: her confusion over who paid for her polygraph test, her equivocation about how many people were at the party, her confusion about whether The Washington Post had reviewed notes from her therapist, and most of all, her fear of flying to Washington for this testimony when she has been able to fly before. (The flying controversy has become the lynchpin of Breitbart’s coverage in particular.) The conservative narrative forming around this is that Blasey Ford simply isn’t trustworthy, and that the foggy, 35-year-old he-said, she-said routine undermines the authority of Congress and unduly smears Kavanaugh.

The dynamic shifted once Kavanaugh took the stand, where he gave a 45-minute impassioned speech and had testy exchanges with the Democratic senators questioning him. The liberal internet again zeroed in on conservative comportment. Kavanaugh’s opening read to that filter bubble as unduly “angry” and “political” for a Supreme Court nominee. The aggression he displayed when being questioned by Senator Amy Klobuchar about his drinking (and his apology for it became its own tale. Lindsay Graham’s send-up of what he perceives as Democratic foot-dragging came off as hypocritical at best, given Republican’s efforts to block President Obama’s Supreme Court nominees) at best, and an irresponsible “temper tantrum” at worst. Much was made over Kavanaugh’s supposed evasive behavior when asked about FBI investigations or Mark Judge, who Blasey Ford claims was with him on the night of the assault. Thumbnail images show Kavanaugh’s face pinched in an angry frown.

To conservatives, Kavanaugh's and Graham’s ire were worth celebrating. In some cases, the nominee was instantly, implicitly believed: “Kavanaugh Clears His Name,” Breitbart says. Over on Fox News, Graham “tears into” Democrats while Trump “blasts” them. Kavanaugh appears far more sympathetic in coverage that highlights his testimony about his young daughter praying for Blasey Ford.

These stances are wildly, maybe disastrously, different. Each side casts the other as inappropriate and lionizes their own entrants into the fray. And as these narratives grow, change, and refract their way across the internet—being discussed and rehashed by people in their own corners of the political spectrum as they go—the gap between them is likely to widen. Partisan narrative has come to trump attempted objectivity. It’s hard to imagine a scenario where that’s less appropriate than when trying to determine whether a man is fit to be an objective arbiter of truth and justice for an entire nation.

tldr everyone is an idiot who cannot think for themselves
 
I honestly don't see how any of you guys find enjoyment out of this. It's been an absolute chore seeing so many friends who I always saw as reasonable turn into the worst kind of feels b4 reals assholes over this shit.

QFT- the only reason I'm not right there with you is I already weeded that garden on Nov 9th, 2016, and it wasn't very fun, but at least I only had to do it once. :(
 
Last edited:
Back