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:
AheKSyL.jpg


I remember early this year when Wolf faced her own series of unprovable allegations, that she was a "comedian" and "funny".

Really. What even is joke, here? I thought period jokes were sexist and cliche? I mean, is this supposed to be irony? That only works if he has a history of *making* period jokes. So, really, what is the joke here?
 
This whole thing was the Dems "Two Minute Hate" to prove their loyalty to The Party. And look good for voters: "See how much we CARE? We practically bled ourselves white for you in there! I mean, wait, I didn't mean to say white.... not like that.... it... no! NO! NOT ROOM 101!!! ANYTHING BUT THAAAAAAAAATTTTT!!!!!"
 
Really. What even is joke, here? I thought period jokes were sexist and cliche? I mean, is this supposed to be irony? That only works if he has a history of *making* period jokes. So, really, what is the joke here?

Her type comes from a time where randomly referencing things like vaginas and dicks was considered funny just for the shock value, now society has become desensitized but some people still havent grown out of it.
 
Her type comes from a time where randomly referencing things like vaginas and dicks was considered funny just for the shock value, now society has become desensitized but some people still havent grown out of it.

The gender-flipped version of "Bro" humor where "You're gay" was the highest form of joke from roughly 1995 - 2002.
 
American Bar Association Rescind Kavanaugh Endorsement, Call for FBI Investigation before the vote

https://archive.is/17lI6

View attachment 553058
That's kinda unsurprising as they're just another left wing organization that masquerades as a neutral one. They're effectively as left wing ss the Federalist Society is right.

To all the people saying Trump will leave the SC in a good place for decades if he gets another confirmation, just remember that Democrats will try to pack the court and Ginsburg will probably survive on foreskin bloodmagic for a longer than we would all like.
 
After all that shit he has suffered i would not be surprised if someone make a gofundme to buy him the most expensive whiskey you can find

Will a hooker be the stretch goal?

Her type comes from a time where randomly referencing things like vaginas and dicks was considered funny just for the shock value, now society has become desensitized but some people still havent grown out of it.

She's reacting to the left's stereotype of the man, assuming he's some kind of macho white guy that hates women. Meaning she's just being sexist.
 
The whole thing was just political theatre designed with optics in mind, designed to influence 2/3 GOP senators one way or the other. Everyone else already made their minds up about what to believe a long time ago, including most of the posters in this thread. That's why political discourse in the West is trash.

The problem is that everyday life has become politicized. Politics have replaced religion as the compass for morality.
Companies have aligned themselves with political values unlike anything every seen before, associations are tied, sports, entertainment, everyday life etc - it's seeped into everything like a disease. So unfortunately "political" discourse, has become regular discourse, which is exhausting.

All this madness could be stopped if people just got a grip on common sense. The 1st world has a general rule of law and order that provides an assumed innocence until proven guilty ; proof being something tangible.
If you err on the side of anyone who makes an accusation, then you remove all order.

So by that notion, employing common sense would say she had no proof of anything, he had proof of the contrary and that's that. But the Democrats decided to filibuster the hearing with "WE BELIEVE YOU oWo", solely because they wanted to provide soundbites for the media to focus on. Not proof, not evidence, not discourse. Just a steering of the narration.

Most people in this thread probably have at least some common sense :optimistic: and "made up their minds" based on the rule of order that you actually need some proof before you draw and quarter someone for a crime. Unless we've all teleported back in time to Salem 1692. In that case, I'm accusing Goody @CatParty of being a 2-door-having Hippocampus-exciting tranny witch and I demand retribution.
 
Last edited:
That's kinda unsurprising as they're just another left wing organization that masquerades as a neutral one. They're effectively as left wing ss the Federalist Society is right.

To all the people saying Trump will leave the SC in a good place for decades if he gets another confirmation, just remember that Democrats will try to pack the court and Ginsburg will probably survive on foreskin bloodmagic for a longer than we would all like.

So I take it my Dunkin Donuts gift bouquet for Sotomayor isn't going to go amiss?
 
Flake just announced he will vote to confirm. Looks like he will get through, and with Flake's vote in the Senate, other RINOs and some Dems in Trump states like Machin have no cover to vote no. They cold still get him in without those votes, but Flake is a bellweather for the most cucked of the cuck insurgency. It looks like Kavanaugh will get in unless something changes
 
The problem is that everyday life has become politicized. Politics have replaced religion as the compass for morality.
Companies have aligned themselves with political values unlike anything every seen before, associations are tied, sports, entertainment, everyday life etc - it's seeped into everything like a disease. So unfortunately "political" discourse, has become regular discourse, which is exhausting.

All this madness could be stopped if people just got a grip on common sense. The 1st world has a general rule of law and order that provides an assumed innocence until proven guilty ; proof being something tangible.
If you err on the side of anyone who makes an accusation, then you remove all order.

So by that notion, employing common sense would say she had no proof of anything, he had proof of the contrary and that's that. But the Democrats decided to filibuster the hearing with "WE BELIEVE YOU oWo", solely because they wanted to provide soundbites for the media to focus on. Not proof, not evidence, not discourse. Just a steering of the narration.

Most people in this thread probably have at least some common sense :optimistic: and "made up their minds" based on the rule of order that you actually need some proof before you draw and quarter someone for a crime. Unless we've all teleported back in time to Salem 1692. In that case, I'm accusing Goody @CatParty of being a 2-door-having Hippocampus-exciting tranny witch and I demand retribution.

I agree with the first paragraph. Everything is REEE DRUMPF REEEEE CLINTON these days. I'm not even a burger and I think it's exhausting, but I try to keep up because, you know, when America sneezes the world catches a cold and all that.

The rest... well, common sense would say that this wasn't a trial, and if it was, there would have been a much more in-depth investigation, more detailed witness cross-examination, more exhibits, more evidence both inculpatory and exculpatory from both sides. As it is, nothing is decided, Blasey-Ford didn't bring anything to the table apart from sworn testimony, and Kavanaugh didn't bring anything except for sworn testimony and his calendar which doesn't prove anything and which was not exculpatory in any fashion. So really it was nothing but posturing from both sides. My position is that there's a vast chasm between following due process and not branding the guy a rapist without a proper investigation and deciding the guy is fit for a lifetime job on the most important court in the world after a shambles of a hearing that wasn't fit for purpose. But apparently not REEEEing about it one way or the other is :dumb::dumb::dumb:
 
So I take it my Dunkin Donuts gift bouquet for Sotomayor isn't going to go amiss?

something something wise Latina lady. God I dislike Sotomayor. Kagan I've read a fair bit of for some academic work I did. I disagreed a lot with her philosophy about executive power - a lot. But there was reason to it and I couldn't say she wasn't learned and didn't act using the basic tenets of reason. Sotomayor's Critical Race Theory shit, on the other hand...
 
View attachment 553190

Can't say I blame him to be fair. If some crazy person came into my workplace and started demanding I look at them when they're screeching at me I'd look uncomfortable.
This is the kind of thing that has me convinced that modern feminism is a net loss for society. It's convinced millions of young women that if they get sexually assaulted no one will care, and that we are constantly one errant political decision away from becoming The Handmaid's Tale. That can't be a healthy way to live.
 
What would happen if Kavanaugh is confirmed? In terms of how the public would react.

A lot of useless articles saying how it's all Trump's fault, the crazies cite the Patriarchy as the lead cause, and various soyboys and white knights falling over themselves to say that Ford is a saint and an injustice has been committed to society.

So you know, a normal day in the modern world.
 
Back