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:
Yeah as lefty as I am I feel like abortion rights are pretty safe on a federal level. We've had how many conservative administrations since Roe vs. Wade, and it still hasn't been fucked with. Hell, hasn't Kavanaugh flat out said he doesn't give a fuck about messing with it?

The main threat to abortion rights is on the state/local level, with the pro-life crowd doing shit like trying to regulate clinics out of existence. Mysteriously this is something the left largely just ignores, probably because the states it's happening in tend to be pretty red and full of dang dirty yt Trump supporters.
 
Roe v Wade will not be repealed. There is nothing in the ruling to dispute as I recall.

What you might see is increased regulation, or more specifically state restrictions on abortion clinics like in Texas and Indiana, being upheld as lawful.

By that logic, Brown V Board should have been overturned with the rise of Reaganism, after all, disenfranchising blacks is what all conservatives want deep down inside.... but it didn't happen, it wasn't even tried. It's incredibly HARD to get the USSC to re-visit anything, and doubly-hard to make them overturn it. You can count on about three fingers on one hand the number of times that has happened. The body is slow to act, by design and by nature, for this very reason, so that even radical swings in public sentiment doesn't rewrite the law book every 20 years....

Overturning Roe V Wade is a liberal boogeyman right up there with God striking down the nation if it ever let gays married was a Right wing one. It's based on a false premise that every, single member of political group "X" wants to see a very radical idea passed above all else.

You could say Roe V Wade was the origin of ID politics in that regard, that somehow, being conservative in any way meant you wanted it utterly destroyed, and that being liberal meant you'd rather stand on a mountain of fetuses than say "Well, it's not for everyone..."

R v W is safe, the panickers are only making themselves look silly and ignorant of civics and history, which isn't unusual in the fee fee era where the mountain of evidence it won't happen can be disregarded because "I get anxious at night".
The thing about Roe v. Wade is that the judicial reasoning is incredibly shaky and the case law it is based on is utter garbage. They made up a right to intimate privacy in your own home and reasoned that you had it because it would be hard to enforce. Somehow this really only applies to abortion and birth control. I wouldn't be surprised if it got overturned just for being shittily reasoned, but I would be surprised if it happened soon due to nobody really wanting to open that can of worms politically. Maybe if Amy Coney Barret replaces Ginsburg or something. Even then it's not like blue states will ban abortion, and many red one's probably won't entirely either. Seeing more state restrictions on it upheld or not challenged at all seems more likely.

The LP telling people to vote for Clinton in swing states was pretty garbage too. Sorta told me all I needed to know about them.
 
Last edited:
If the Supreme Court were meant to represent America's population, seven of the justices would be white, one of them would be a stay-at-home mom, and none of them would find SJW antics amusing.

It should be noted before Trump came along, the Supreme Court was made up entirely of Catholics, Jews, and a token black. Not one White Protestant, which is not reflective of the population at all.
 
The thing about Roe v. Wade is that the judicial reasoning is incredibly shaky and the case law it is based on is utter garbage. They made up a right to intimate or privacy in your own home and reasoned that you had it because it would be hard to enforce. Somehow this really only applies to abortion and birth control. I wouldn't be surprised if it got overturned just for being shittily reasoned, but I would be surprised if it happened soon due to nobody really wanting to open that can of worms politically.

I agree with this but for different reasons. I think anyone who wanted to make a case against abortion would have to go through Planned Parenthood v. Casey but because of the way it played out, it doesn't seem likely to happen. The Supreme Court already hit back on states' restrictions with Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt. So, legally, I don't think there's much to gain. The other reason I don't see it going anywhere goes back to what TowinKarz brought up. It is the most viable of ID politics. It may sound a bit tinfoil hat but it's financially beneficial for both sides to maintain the status quo.

Yesterday, Michael Avenatti released a statement from Julie Swetnick. I think that's all of the named accusers accounted for.

http://archive.is/LH4MQ

It comes off worse than Ramirez's. I don't know if it's the wording or the bold, but it just reads like a catty blog post. My opinion on Avenatti probably has something to do with me thinking that though.
 
Last edited:
Yeah as lefty as I am I feel like abortion rights are pretty safe on a federal level. We've had how many conservative administrations since Roe vs. Wade, and it still hasn't been fucked with. Hell, hasn't Kavanaugh flat out said he doesn't give a fuck about messing with it?

The main threat to abortion rights is on the state/local level, with the pro-life crowd doing shit like trying to regulate clinics out of existence. Mysteriously this is something the left largely just ignores, probably because the states it's happening in tend to be pretty red and full of dang dirty yt Trump supporters.

That's because a lot of lefties only seem to understand central control. Because that's the tail that wags the dog in their minds. They don't seem to comprehend that the reason the Dems are so fucked is because the local parties are out of power and money.

That's why Graham didn't give a fuck when that woman screamed at him that she's going to vote him out of office. His response was "Good, I hope you move to south Carolina." He knows he doesn't have to listen to lefties that's in Washington. Only his own constituent base in Carolina. A base he can spend two years and time to build a warchest to defeat whatever walking corpse he will go against.
 
I think anyone who wanted to make a case against abortion would have to go through Planned Parenthood v. Casey but because of the way it played out, it doesn't seem likely to happen.

Theoretically, abortion would have to be completely rethought if the personhood of the unborn were recognized*. That would be opening up a whole new can of worms, however, as we would have to address an insane number of legal matters, including how we count our population (and more importantly, as a result, apportion representation in Congress). That's a huge mess that is unlikely to happen, but it would be one angle of attack.


* I use "recognized" not out of my personal beliefs here, but because under the theory of rights we use in America, the government does not confer a right, but acknowledges that it was already and always there.
 
43312581_2237335529817683_1603422106048004096_o.jpg

I'm loving all these classy empowered women the reeeeesistance has brought out.
 
View attachment 562466
I'm loving all these classy empowered women the reeeeesistance has brought out.

And how is she going to screen them out? Make them take a polygraph test before signing the consent form? Most chaps I know would simply go, "fuck that noise" and sod off home for a wank.
 
Yeah as lefty as I am I feel like abortion rights are pretty safe on a federal level. We've had how many conservative administrations since Roe vs. Wade, and it still hasn't been fucked with. Hell, hasn't Kavanaugh flat out said he doesn't give a fuck about messing with it?

The main threat to abortion rights is on the state/local level, with the pro-life crowd doing shit like trying to regulate clinics out of existence. Mysteriously this is something the left largely just ignores, probably because the states it's happening in tend to be pretty red and full of dang dirty yt Trump supporters.

As someone on the Right, I will say that the rights stand on the legality of abortion is not as cut and dry as the left makes it. With a broad range of positions. About the one common feeling is legal or not there is no societal benefit to funding it via tax dollars or subsidies. You will see Planned Parenthood’s Federal funding cut long before the subject of Roe v Wade comes up. The other thing you will see challenged is those lunatic court decisions that blocked the states from applying the same health care and health code requirements of any other outpatient surgical procedure center to abortion clinics. Things like they must have local admitting privileges, certain equipment on hand, perform and report spore tests and undergo strict annual inspections. I can see the court revisiting those lower court decisions. The circuit courts view that enforcing common,universal and proven standards of care on the providers is in some way a violation of women’s health care rights has always seemed a bit suspect.
 
As someone on the Right, I will say that the rights stand on the legality of abortion is not as cut and dry as the left makes it. With a broad range of positions. About the one common feeling is legal or not there is no societal benefit to funding it via tax dollars or subsidies. You will see Planned Parenthood’s Federal funding cut long before the subject of Roe v Wade comes up. The other thing you will see challenged is those lunatic court decisions that blocked the states from applying the same health care and health code requirements of any other outpatient surgical procedure center to abortion clinics. Things like they must have local admitting privileges, certain equipment on hand, perform and report spore tests and undergo strict annual inspections. I can see the court revisiting those lower court decisions. The circuit courts view that enforcing common,universal and proven standards of care on the providers is in some way a violation of women’s health care rights has always seemed a bit suspect.
If the left hadn’t thrown such a fit over inspections being a violation of women’s health and safety, then Gosnell never would’ve been allowed to get to the point of being a house of horrors, which wouldn’t have given a number of states reason to go investigating their own operations.
 
That's because a lot of lefties only seem to understand central control. Because that's the tail that wags the dog in their minds. They don't seem to comprehend that the reason the Dems are so fucked is because the local parties are out of power and money.

That's why Graham didn't give a fuck when that woman screamed at him that she's going to vote him out of office. His response was "Good, I hope you move to south Carolina." He knows he doesn't have to listen to lefties that's in Washington. Only his own constituent base in Carolina. A base he can spend two years and time to build a warchest to defeat whatever walking corpse he will go against.

I think the dems themselves know it, though. That's why they are so frothing at the mouth angry over losing the POTUS and SCOTUS in one 2 year window.

They know the only hope of keeping the red yokels down is Executive Order and favorable liberal interpretation of all law, without that, they've got nothing to stop their rotten local bases from falling out from under them and collapsing the party.
 
Last edited:
As someone on the Right, I will say that the rights stand on the legality of abortion is not as cut and dry as the left makes it. With a broad range of positions. About the one common feeling is legal or not there is no societal benefit to funding it via tax dollars or subsidies. You will see Planned Parenthood’s Federal funding cut long before the subject of Roe v Wade comes up. The other thing you will see challenged is those lunatic court decisions that blocked the states from applying the same health care and health code requirements of any other outpatient surgical procedure center to abortion clinics. Things like they must have local admitting privileges, certain equipment on hand, perform and report spore tests and undergo strict annual inspections. I can see the court revisiting those lower court decisions. The circuit courts view that enforcing common,universal and proven standards of care on the providers is in some way a violation of women’s health care rights has always seemed a bit suspect.
I've actually read about pro-life abortion clinics. That's the weirdest oxymoron, but I've read about them. They tend to operate on educating the person how to raise their child and have programs to help them if they choose to keep the child. They'll still commit abortions if the patient feels that's in their best interest, but usually they try to tell them the risks and dangers along with asking that they think about it. It's a pretty responsible set up and I understand they're significantly cleaner than the average Planned Parenthood, too. They also actually have birth control seminars and dispense them -- whereas I remember reading Planned Parenthood gutted that aspect of their funding in favor of increasing abortions.
 
There are medical cases where an abortion is necessary -- stillborn child, ectopic pregnancy, etc. In those cases, it's a sad but necessary action unless you want the woman to die (which, contrary to lefties' hallucinations, most conservatives and pro-life types don't want).

However, the casual 'get my uterus vacuumed out' mentality is pretty appalling, and it's why resistance to abortion has crystallized so strongly and refused to die off.

The left also loves to conflate birth control and abortion. They're faggots in that way.
 
The thing about Roe v. Wade is that the judicial reasoning is incredibly shaky and the case law it is based on is utter garbage. They made up a right to intimate privacy in your own home and reasoned that you had it because it would be hard to enforce. Somehow this really only applies to abortion and birth control. I wouldn't be surprised if it got overturned just for being shittily reasoned, but I would be surprised if it happened soon due to nobody really wanting to open that can of worms politically. Maybe if Amy Coney Barret replaces Ginsburg or something. Even then it's not like blue states will ban abortion, and many red one's probably won't entirely either. Seeing more state restrictions on it upheld or not challenged at all seems more likely.
Lmao if you think Roe v Wade was a shit argument read more into Brown vs Board of Education. You may think that decision declared separate and equal unconstitutional and all racial based discrimination void as a result, but actually it ruled only discrimination that resulted in feelings of inferiority was unconstitutional.

Wrap your brain around that one.
 
Back