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:
Do6xyUzXUAAV8pm.jpg

31e7b071925a94620649c6265b90e613.png
Yea, that article is retarded as all hell.

There might be some truth in the lose a 'battle but win the war' though. Having Kavanaugh go through will probably help democrats stoke the outrage of their hardcores and get people out to vote in the midterms.

There's at least three problems with that calculation though:
- Getting a good election result in the Senate and/or the House is small compensation compared to nominating a justice to the supreme court. House/Senate majorities can shift every second years, a young justice can stay for 30-40
- The more the democrat hardcore base is activated, the more they act like violent apes, so the republican base gets activated too.
- The more the democrat hardcore base is activated, the more they act like violent apes, so they scare away moderate democrats from voting Democrat and drives undecided normies into the arms of the Republicans.
 
Serious question here, Soros has Dutch? I believe citizenry so how come no one blinks when he pours tons of money into influencing foreign elections/political processes and in some cases even sends foreign agents to literally meddle in foreign elections. Doesn't this violate all kinds of anti espionage/influence laws?
 
Serious question here, Soros has Dutch? I believe citizenry so how come no one blinks when he pours tons of money into influencing foreign elections/political processes and in some cases even sends foreign agents to literally meddle in foreign elections. Doesn't this violate all kinds of anti espionage/influence laws?
Why the fuck you think 90% of the world wants his head?
The problem is that he bought the law in those 90% of countrys
 
Serious question here, Soros has Dutch? I believe citizenry so how come no one blinks when he pours tons of money into influencing foreign elections/political processes and in some cases even sends foreign agents to literally meddle in foreign elections. Doesn't this violate all kinds of anti espionage/influence laws?
There's a case coming to the supreme court in November that's going to cover that
 

Attachments

  • danger.png
    danger.png
    26.8 KB · Views: 165
Serious question here, Soros has Dutch? I believe citizenry so how come no one blinks when he pours tons of money into influencing foreign elections/political processes and in some cases even sends foreign agents to literally meddle in foreign elections. Doesn't this violate all kinds of anti espionage/influence laws?

Soro’s is a Hungarian born US Citizen.
 
Serious question here, Soros has Dutch? I believe citizenry so how come no one blinks when he pours tons of money into influencing foreign elections/political processes and in some cases even sends foreign agents to literally meddle in foreign elections. Doesn't this violate all kinds of anti espionage/influence laws?

As others have said he's Hungarian born but has U.S. citizenship. It should be noted he's utterly hated in his home country to the point that the current ruling party there has passed laws to shut down some of his universities and institutions, and make it harder for his other organizations to operate in the country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
While a military invasion would be nearly impossible because of the US's military might, advantageous geography, population, social dynamics, and other nations lack of ability tk project power, what do you call 30 million people and rising entering the country illegally through the southern border and totally changing the areas they congregate in

That's why I said "Nobody is equipped to invade the U.S. openly."
 
Yea, that article is exceptional as all hell.

There might be some truth in the lose a 'battle but win the war' though. Having Kavanaugh go through will probably help democrats stoke the outrage of their hardcores and get people out to vote in the midterms.

There's at least three problems with that calculation though:
- Getting a good election result in the Senate and/or the House is small compensation compared to nominating a justice to the supreme court. House/Senate majorities can shift every second years, a young justice can stay for 30-40
- The more the democrat hardcore base is activated, the more they act like violent apes, so the republican base gets activated too.
- The more the democrat hardcore base is activated, the more they act like violent apes, so they scare away moderate democrats from voting Democrat and drives undecided normies into the arms of the Republicans.

Except the democrats didn't need to do that. Blonald Drumpf has already fully triggered the left wing base. This Kavenaugh shit hasn't changed things on that end one jot. What is has done however was shake the right wing base out of its complacency. It's also done nothing to convince people who voted for Trump in 2016 to vote Democrat this year, which is what they needed to do. They should have gone with the far right activist and drunkard line of attack. That least could be provable and not quite so likely to trigger a backlash as Reeeeeeeee WHITE MEN RAPING EVERYBODY!
 
This story from last October's Business Insider reads even funnier today. I can't believe this was a year ago.

Trump is reportedly talking about Supreme Court justices' health issues, privately predicting he'll be able to appoint 4
Peter Jacobs
Oct. 15, 2017, 8:20 PM

President Donald Trump has already appointed one Supreme Court justice, and he is reportedly telling people he believes he will appoint three more.

Multiple sources told Jonathan Swan of the news website Axios that Trump was openly predicting he would be able to fill four Supreme Court seats as president.

One of Trump's signature victories as president has been the appointment of Justice Neil Gorsuch, who filled the seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016. The battle to fill Scalia's seat was contentious, with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell refusing to consider a nominee proposed by President Barack Obama.

Justice Anthony Kennedy, 81, is rumored to be thinking about retirement. Trump, according to Axios, also thinks he'll be able to replace Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, citing their health.

Talking about the 84-year-old Ginsburg, one source told Axios, Trump said: "What does she weigh? Sixty pounds?"

Trump has talked about Sotomayor's Type 1 diabetes, according to Axios, telling the source: "Her health, no good. Diabetes."

Sotomayor, 63, was appointed by Obama and is one of the younger justices on the court.

If Trump is able to replace Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor, he could radically change the makeup of the Supreme Court.

Kennedy, who was appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, is a moderate conservative, often providing the deciding vote on 5-4 decisions.

Both Ginsburg and Sotomayor were appointed by Democrats — Bill Clinton and Obama, respectively — and are considered liberal justices. Replacing even one would allow Trump to shift the balance of the court to the right.

Justice Stephen Breyer, another liberal, is 79 years old.

The President with his usual, ahem, delicate way of putting things about dear RBG.
 
Can a president nominate himself to the Supreme Court? Asking for a friend.

History shows us fat Republican presidents become Chief Justice after all...
 
Last edited:
He strikes me as the guy who wears a trench coat and hangs around playgrounds to ask the children if they want some candy. Just say no.
I'm not particularly trying to frame Chuck Wendig of anything (despite how much I may loathe the guy), but his second Star Wars book was very... questionable (as well as terrible). It even starts off with a highly detailed description of a barely dressed slave boy and his feet, right down to details of the smallest cut and toe nail on his "slender big boy" skin. The guy honestly deserves his own thread for all the hilariously weird shit he's pulled, but until he does something truly fucked up, I might not be inclined to make it (that and I'm lazy). So if someone else makes it, I welcome it.

Yeah, I miss the days when SNL skewered Democrats and Republicans equally.
The days of unbiased and uncensored humor is over sadly. But at least Mad TV had the decency to end at the (almost) right time while having unbiased humor that parodied every walk of life. Fuck it, I'm gonna post some MAD to erase the awful taste of SNL.
I like how the guy voting for Bush is black and that the Steven Seagal parody is basically a perfect representative of current politics.
"Vote for whoever I say or I'll destroy you! Also vote for this guy because he's a minority! Also fuck the Russians and you are all literally jew killing nazis!"
This fucking sketch was prophetic.
 
Last edited:
I'm not trying to frame Chuck Wendig of anything, but his second Star Wars book was very... odd (as well as terrible). It even starts off with a highly detailed description of a barely dressed slave boy and his feet, right down to details of the smallest cut and toe nail. The guy honestly deserves his own thread for all the hilariously weird shit he's pulled, but until he does something truly fucked up, I might not be inclined to make it (that and I'm lazy).


The days of unbiased and uncensored humor is over sadly. But at least Mad TV had the decency to end at the (almost) right time while having unbiased humor that mocked every walk of life. Fuck it, I'm gonna post some MAD to erase the awful taste of SNL.
I like how the guy voting for Bush is black and the Steven Seagal parody is basically a perfect representative of current politics.

This fucking sketch was prophetic.

That's my second favorite MadTV sketch .
 
  • Like
Reactions: GeneralFriendliness
Except the democrats didn't need to do that. Blonald Drumpf has already fully triggered the left wing base. This Kavenaugh shit hasn't changed things on that end one jot. What is has done however was shake the right wing base out of its complacency. It's also done nothing to convince people who voted for Trump in 2016 to vote Democrat this year, which is what they needed to do.
Since Democrats tend to have worse turnout than Republicans and their bases are of similar size, it's arguably more important for Democrats to energize their base rather than turn around people who voted for Trump. Even if it shakes up the republican base as well, since it's more engaged to begin with.

So unless their petulant behavior turns away one reasonable centrist for every intersectional crazyhair it gets off the couch, it could work out for them. But unfortunately for them, that's exactly what their chimp-outs does.
 
Why the fuck you think 90% of the world wants his head?
The problem is that he bought the law in those 90% of countrys

Actually at last check about 90% of the world does want his head. (The other 10% he hasn't actually crashed their economies yet.) One of the first real signs of an actual relationship between Trump and Putin would be Trump giving Putin a trussed up Soros as a wedding present. Soros has cost a lot of important people a lot of major money by fraudulently manipulating the currency trading system and crashing national currencies. He nearly wiped out a bunch of British Banks a few years ago. Quite a few in the Middle East would shed no tears should an accident happen either. And much of the current resentment between Moscow and Washington stems from Soros doing his best to shatter the newborn Russian Capitalist Economy awhile back, and being protected by the US Left and other bought off establishment types. Yes he's bought a lot of protection (Clinton's Obama, etc) but he has also made a lot of real enemies.
 
Back