It's a done deal but the Democrats will have to go through their whole "resistance" song and dance just because. Not like they have anything better to do right.
1
So this guy who wrote the Starr Report and hounded
Clinton decided Vince Foster killed himself, so this
is something good?
wow
Who knows, maybe he’ll develop a win/win approach on key issues. I just hope I don’t need to wear a star on my arm in the future to buy a Coke at a gas station!
If this had been a "normal" election where the parties were at least speaking to one another and not castigating each other, this nominee could expect to get at least 80 votes in an non-partisan confirmation. But it is not a normal political period. Even a nominee that fulfills every possible checklist that a Supreme Court nominee would usually have to have, cannot expect a confirmation vote to exceed 53. Now Justice Gorsuch got only 54 votes.
All of this goes to show that even an exceptionally well qualified nominee can barely get thru the confirmation process. This is because the two parties have solidified to the point that one party is not going to vote for the other party's nominee unless that nominee is perceived as being either liberal or conservative.
Of course, the Supreme Court shares some of the responsibility for the struggle to get a nominee confirmed. Since the Court has involved itself in the controversial social issues of the day, without finding no express constitutional support for its decisions, the Court has become a political institution, not a legal one, and is treated as such by much of the public.
In order for the Court to regain the kind of legitimacy it once held it must return to a stricter interpretation of the Constitution. This means that implied rights deriving from the word "liberty" in the Constitution must stop. If a right is important enough to be considered constitutional, it must be enacted by Congress or by amendment..
4
Since Judge Kavanaugh was so involved in the Bush ll White House legal staff I am curious to know how much input he had in the “Torture Memos” and the legality of the policies of Mr Bush’s “wartime” endeavors?
What is surfacing now is anodyne “common sense”—see the remarks on Climate Change—but there seems to be very little will on Judge Kavanaugh‘s part to actually do anything in response to those concerns. I hope the details on these issues surfaces, particularly from the time in his career when he was in a position to advocate for particular policy.
Like other candidates, he had a private interview with Trump. But with his ruling class background, he knew the right answers. Is there any doubt that Trump asked him about 'loyalty'? Is there any doubt that he made it clear that he would be 'loyal' if the time came. He is Trump's get-out-of-jail-free card.
1
The ring is full, let the circus now proceed in earnest.There is no semblance of justice for ALL. His experience,background and prior positions are not centrist-It is a political appointment designed to fulfill the wishes of the ruling party.That was never the intent for a chamber that was supposed to be balanced, fair and non-political.They were the equalizer between the Executive and legislative branches who we know will do any any everything to get elected and stay elected..
All the while, the Democratic Party and the American sit on their hands and fiddle while America burns. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?
1
The judge seems reasonable. And wanting a conservative court is compatible with decency. But getting that court by knowingly voting for alternative-fact-purveyor-in-chief is not, and never will be.
1
Kavanaugh is exemplary of how the Olin Foundation's Law and Economics curriculum along with the millions they gave to prominent law schools to implement it has paid off in spades. Our judicial system has been fully and completely politicized and we are no longer a government of the people and by the people. Welcome to the United States of America, Inc.
5
Now let's pull out all the legislative/parliamentary stops Democrats, and delay this confirmation until well after the midterm elections. It's about time that McConnell had to chew on some bad karma. "What goes around, comes around".
4
I fear for the citizenry of this country if Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court.
1
Please check out Rep. Zoe Lofgren's questioning of Ken Starr during the impeachment hearings to see how corrupt the office where Kavanaugh got his start was.
Starr hemmed and hawed and refused to answer a very simple question from Rep. Zofgren:
"...when did you first hear any information to the effect that a tape recording existed of a woman, any woman, who claimed to have had a sexual contact with President Clinton?"
Starr's non-answer included a implication that the answer to that question might not be "germane". Except for the fact that Tripp - after meeting that October with a Federalist Society lawyer - stopped asking Monica Lewinsky for details of her affair and started egging her on to ask the President to get her a job.
Funny how Tripp's egging on Monica to get the President to give her a job was exactly the evidence Starr's office needed to get involved. When Tripp was just recording sexual accounts, Starr's office had no reason to get involved. They needed a reason and without Tripp's getting Monica to ask for job, a sexual affair was not a crime.
Why didn't Starr answer the question? And will Kavanaugh testify under oath that he had no inkling that anyone was illegally recording the President's mistress all fall when Tripp was egging on Monica to ask for a job? How long did Starr's office know of Tripp's illegal taping before Tripp supposedly showed up at their door with exactly the "evidence" Starr's office needed to get involved?
Ask him under oath.
5
“The net neutrality rule is unlawful,” he wrote, “because the rule impermissibly infringes on the internet service providers’ editorial discretion.”
ISPs have "editorial discretion" in the sense that news outlets have it?
4
Must be terrible for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (RBG) to know Amy Coney Barrett (ACB) is waiting in the wings for her SCOTUS seat.
6
I wonder where he finds in the original text of the constitution that the President cannot be indicted for a crime.
5
This is like the middle ages when the king could stack the deck in his favor. He also had devine right as to put himself above laws of the time.Even as they love a hobo brain POTUS,his followers laud his few dire accomplishments, while so many depend on medicaid funded by Obama. Our foolish voters are taking a giant step backward .I hope I am wrong but what I have seen since the 60s has now gotten worse under each president except for Obama who saved our economy ,which Trump Takes credit for and Carter, who let his fed tame inflation. Get out and vote for a democrat in order to give your children a chance in life.
3
I hope somebody asks him if a president can pardon himself and, therefore, is above the law.
6
Trumps " reasons " for this choice : To avoid Indictment, and to criminalize Abortion. Personally, he couldn't care less about abortion, but his Evangelical fans certainly do. Saint Donald, the Emperor of Wombs. Get to work, Women. November is coming. Finally.
4
Religious freedom of course included freedom to have an abortion of a little ball of cells without a brain. And of course freedom to kill adult humans on death row. Kavanaugh is for freedom of religion.
Conservatives are happy that 45 has picked a judge who believes Obama was above the law....
“The earth is warming. Humans are contributing. I understand the international impact and the problem of the commons. The pope’s involved.”
Only a few card-carrying Roman Catholics would say such an idiotic thing. It is horrible to think that a person with such a closed mind is very likely going to be a Supreme Court judge.
1
If it was left to the ignorant Right we would be rolling the clock in the time machine all the way back to the 50’s then break the clock. These people are so fanatically opposed to progress they literally cannot see straight. We as a people are doomed to live in the world we ourselves have created in spite of ourselves.
2
A president under investigation by the FBI should not have a righty to appoint a SupremeCourt justice so close to an election. In other words, no filling a stolen seat.
5
Thank you Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer !
His two adolescent daughters will either: moderate his view, or rebel against it and cause much familial strife.
They might also advise him to wash his hand after shaking Trump's tiny, filthy hand.
2
While Kavanaugh may lean toward curbing power of administrative agencies, he apparently is disciple of the beliefs of Dick Cheny -- granting more empirical power to the presidency. His treatise which proposed that a sitting president should be above the law, even to being under investigation, should be an overwhelming alarm to every American. This president has already taken the U.S. out of the enviable strata of democracies and into the gang of despots and dictators. I am not religious, but will pray religiously that this SCOTUS nominee is barred from feeding the fire to "Make America Great Again", an oxymoron if there ever was one.
3
To all of Democrats who voted for Jill Stein or didn’t vote in 2016, this SCOTUS appointment is on you.
9
Kavanaugh may be hard to vote against for too many Dems from Red States. It may be hard to paint him as a fire-breathing hard right ideologue.
I can’t imagine Murkowski or Collins voting No and Flake and Corker don’t have the backbone to do it even though they’re out of there in January. Too many lucrative speaking gigs would disappear.
Here’s my only hope at this point:
SC justices get more liberal as they age—>
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/supreme-court-justices-get-more-lib...
1
NYTimes, please stop using deceptive terms.
What your front page labels "religious freedom" is actually permission to violate rights of others, with the excuse of claim to believe in a theological delusion.
6
Senator: Judge Kavanaugh, in a New York Times article on July 10, John G. Malcolm, a lawyer with the Heritage Foundation described you as an advocate of "textualist, originalist opinions". Assuming you agree with Mr. Malcolm, does this apply to original text of the the Second Amendment's premise of a "well-regulated militia"?
Another area from the article which should be probed by Dems is the striking down of net neutrality, an issue that fires up young people beyond belief, yet the Dems unbelievably do not pounce on.
7
“A president who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation,” Kavanaugh wrote, “is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as president.”
That would seem to be precisely why Donald Trump is doing such an abomination of a job as president. The really important question is this: If Trump had nothing to hide and a clear conscience, why does he act like a man who is terrified of being found out?
5
Amongst the numerous other areas of confirmation inquiry by the Senate, was Kavanaugh, as a member of Bush's White House staff, at all involved in promoting the utterly disastrous falsehood to the American public that Saddam Hussein possessed "weapons of mass destruction", that Administration's justification for the Iraq War? Who knows what possible incriminating information lies buried in Bush's presidential archive. Time to start digging.
1
Have we all lost our minds? Trump is not qualified to nominate someone to sit on a tennis court. The vast preponderance of his legal perspective was gained as serial defendant, bankruptcy candidate, divorce supplicant and multiple sexual assault suspect. Usually the judicial system doesn't place too much credence on whom the inmates would like to see on the bench.
8
Trump and his lawyers may have primarily focused on each candidate's likelihood of supporting Trump in any future proceedings before the Supreme Court. This is a naked political appointment driven to preserve Trump's power and to create a new Super-monopoly Republican government heretofore destroying the democracy required in our federal government.
2
Alas in area after area Judge Kavanaugh tilts against the public interest. Why is it a "new right" for an immigrant to exercise choice over giving birth? Why is the President above the law? What is labeled "conservative" is really radical and I inhumane no matter how his Yale education enables the judge to wrap his opinions in fine words.
3
It's difficult to consider the Supreme Court as the Guardians of Law and Order, to be the final arbiters of Justice, when the people who added the last member and who are sponsoring the next, are clearly criminals of the first order.
Government should have the consent of the Governed. And Gorsuch knows absolutely that he clearly didn't, but he took the job anyway,
6
Kavanaugh's notion that a sitting president cannot be the subject of a criminal investigation is confounding. The Constitution specifically allows for impeachment of a president. How could any impeachment or eventual trial occur without an investigation in the first place?
Also, did Trump make a deal with Kennedy for his retirement in exchange for the nomination of Kavanaugh? How strange is that or perhaps it's something that has occurred before on the Court?
8
Leslie Duval: While I generally don't go the conspiracy path, there IS the little matter of Kennedy's son being a high placed executive with Deutsche Bank...you know, the one that has dubious relationships with both Russia and Trump and the only bank who would give Trump money (clean laundry anyone?). So, yeah, there probably was a little bit of "collusion" regarding when Kennedy would retire. How convenient for Trump that there was a candidate in Kavanaugh who purports that a president should not be indicted nor even investigated while in office, and that McConnell wants to vet him in a nano-second to influence elections. So I guess we will never know if Mueller is shut down.
2
Kavanaugh's idea that a President should not be subject to civil lawsuits nor criminal investigations for no better reason than because it will be too distracting for him is, in Kavanaugh's own words "a constitutional principle as novel as it is wrong."
By example, we have lost count of the number of days Trump has left the White House to play golf and have no idea of the number of hours of morning executive time he has used to watch TV. This President has plenty of time on his hands.
If Kavanaugh is truly an originalist or strict constructionist, he should acknowledge that because the text of the Constitution does not explicitly state that a sitting President may not be indicted, it must have been the framers' intent that a sitting President may be indicted. To decide otherwise is to impart meaning to the framers' language that simply is not there.
Here's the obvious truth. Kavanaugh is a 24 carat solid gold right wing conservative. As such, he has certain personal core beliefs. As a judge, he uses his wit and brainpower to find seemingly justifiable legal constitutional arguments to further his core beliefs. Those arguments are not absolute and are not without opposition. However, if he is confirmed, that opposition will lose 5-4 every time.
14
Everything the majority of this country is against. The conservatives are always 100 years behind everyone else.
8
“A president who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation,” Judge Kavanaugh wrote, “is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as president.” That hypothetical assumes that our president could do a worse job. Any president who maneuvers the system to commit crimes must, in Judge Kavanaugh’s view, earn immunity from criminal investigation. That is a standing invitation to criminality Nixon would have liked. Houston, we have a problem. Because there is always Congress, being the government ready to help in the words of Saint Reagan, and boy, have we gotten an insolvable mess. Which came first, presidential crime or inability to fight crime? Ought not courts resolve problems, instead of making them hopeless? Judge Kavanaugh must believe there be enough GOP Senatorial votes to convert Judge Kavanaugh’s government from one of laws to one of men.
What part of the Constitution renders appropriate a president’s, with aforethought, immunizing his crimes by hand-picking the Supreme Court? That pardon could so easily be incorporated into the GOP oath of office.
3
A man with a fair mind and strong credentials. He calls ‘me as he sees them under the law rather than letting personal or political views color his decisions. Perfect.
May right minded people unit behind him despite the inevitable partisan sniping ahead.
3
A very competent, capable, cerebral legal mind. He will be confirmed. There is no reason otherwise.
6
“A president who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation,” Judge Kavanaugh wrote, “is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as president.” That hypothetical assumes that our president could do a worse job. Any president who maneuvers the system to commit crimes must, in Judge Kavanaugh’s view, earn immunity from criminal investigation. That is a standing invitation to criminality Nixon would have liked. Houston, we have a problem. Because there is always Congress, being the government ready to help in the words of Saint Reagan, and boy, have we gotten an insolvable mess. Which came first, presidential crime or inability to fight crime? Ought not courts resolve problems, instead of making them hopeless? Judge Kavanaugh must believe there be enough GOP Senatorial votes to support Judge Kavanaugh’s government of men and not of laws.
What part of the Constitution renders appropriate a president’s, with aforethought, immunizing his crimes by hand-picking the Supreme Court? That pardon could so easily be incorporated into the GOP oath of office.
1
Kavanaugh is eminently qualified with as much experience as any other judge currently on the supreme court - If the democrats overplay their hand they will please the far left west coast and northeast corridor liberals and lose the Midwest working class voters that swung the election - I don't envy the choice that the democratic senators up for reelection in states easily won by Trump - If they vote against Kavanaugh they will likely lose in November -
6
Kavanaugh is another reason why Supreme Court justice appointments should be limited to ten years. As the "solid conservative" label shows, ironically, candidates are nominated not for their ability to be impartial, but for their biases. Lifetime appointments do not soften these biases, but instead lead to ideological entrenchment that often caters to special interests (such as big corporations) instead of addressing injustices citizens suffer (such as the employees of big corporations).
6
Two reasons only why Trump chose Kavanaugh and both have nothing to do with the Constitution or the laws of the land. Rather it is only about holding on to his evangelical base with its relentless effort to overturn Roe v Wade..and to be protected as a sitting president from being indicted. So, let's not pretend otherwise. And the sad thing about it is that this Senate, including Manchin and Dem colleagues in Red states, will confirm this guy. Our three branches of government have officially become a controlling and powerful Triumvirate which is slowly but surely tromping on our democratic rights. I am so frustrated and disgusted.
23
“The net neutrality rule is unlawful,” he wrote, “because the rule impermissibly infringes on the internet service providers’ editorial discretion.”
Can someone explain this to me? An internet service provider is providing a service—access to the internet not editorial decisions. This is equivalent to a telephone or cell phone provider having the discretion to block some of your calls or the calls you make.
12
Agree.its more like a utility.
3
Isn't it curious that strict construction somehow always manages to support a conservative outcome? Of course they are superimposing their interpretation. Expect more from drone Kavanaugh. This is not a pick for an independent justice. This is a highly political and politicized nominee. The Supreme Court is slowly losing its once valued independence and becoming just an appendage and even a rubber stamp for GOP hard liners. This man is such a Washington insider it is beyond question that he will be a good little Republican and vote exactly as the conservatives want and possibly even instruct. That is why they picked him. It is obviously the game he has played his entire life. I'm not impressed but I'm not surprised.
3
As to Kavanaugh's ideas about indicting presidents, I think it's odd that someone who is "supremely" cast with upholding the rule of law is OK with a criminal president sitting in the Oval Office so as not to distract him from what? More criminal activities committed while in office? It doesn't make sense. You'd think a judge would want to get the criminal out of the office, not keep him/her there longer.
12
They kept Clinton in office as they should have.
The judge is right. The Ken Starr investigation most likely distracted President Clinton from focusing on what he himself stated was the growing threat of Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan and elsewhere in the Middle East.
The current investigation is also turning out to be just as farcical since its deviation from its original mission.
In the spectrum of crimes, lying under oath about an affair pales in comparison to treason, emoluments violations, and more, right? Keeping Trump, a mobster and a con man, from committing more crimes in our name seems paramount to upholding the rule of law in this country. Allowing him free reign so as "not to distract him" is ludicrous.
Another victory for the deconstruction of the administrative state.
4
The only reason Trump chose him:
'He concluded that sitting presidents should not be distracted by civil suits or criminal proceedings. “A president who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation,” he wrote, “is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as president.”'
4
As the choices go what strikes me about this pick is less his conservatism, which is to be expected from a GOP Presidential SCOTUS nominee. The Judge has two traits that are remarkably un-Trump like. He’s got a long track record of commitment to pubic service and is without a doubt a truly capably professional who takes his job and duties very seriously.
So I sit on my couch and shrug my shoulders and it could be much worse, which is evidence of 45’s true legacy and impact; drastically lowered expectations for our country. This is the real threat to our country’s long-term survival.
6
Just curious if I can get bets down in New Jersey on how he will vote on any social legislation. It will be as close to a sure thing as you can find.
1
Seems like a reasonable choice, considering the source. Very concerned about his reverence for executive power and contradictory disdain for for executive power in its regulatory form. Seems a political streatch. Agree the constitution does not reflect any anticipation of the difficulty of modern governance but it doesn't negate dealing with it either. There is an element of country club hypocrisy here. His selection was the real choice the 2016 election was so important, not the obvious qualities of Hillary as much.
3
Civil, yes;
Intellectual, yes;
But his reliably conservative opinions may change the balance of the court for a generation or two, and his nomination was born of a two-fold theft:
The theft of Merrick Garland's nomination (Senator McConnell);
And the theft of respect for the office of President of the United States - the racist result of the drum beat of: "should someone who probably was born in Kenya, and maybe is a Muslim choose the replacement for Scalia?" - with Donald Trump as drum major.
It is ironic, but fitting in a dark way, that the person who continually showed the least respect for a sitting president is now the president who will be least respected by history.
9
This questions comes to mind! How much power does Trump have on the members of the Supreme Court? i.e. (the obvious) Can he use this power to influence how the court members vote on a particularly law? Because I am truly becoming frightened of his power over - it seems -- everyone and everything. America should also be frightened! This is becoming serious now.
3
It has been noted that Judge Kavanaugh is a Constitution adherent in a conservative belief of the founders intent. The founders, having recognized the centuries of tyrannical kings and queens, proclaimed a new form of representative government answering to the people of our nation, and free of external religious influence. With the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh to ascend to the Supreme court would come a super monopoly single party Federal government that answers only to half the citizens of our nation while victimizing all others by a lack of representation, as adequately demonstrated by efforts to derail the Affordable Care Act, and promises to disassemble the social support the government provides to 40 million Americans. Judge Kavanaugh, now visibly elated may not recognize these grander themes of unconstitutional reality. Ignoring my bias towards Democrats, I look to a higher meaning of American politics; True representation of all citizens by the federal government charged with that solemn responsibility by our Constitution. With Judge Kavanaugh's ascension to the court would come that monopoly government and the destruction of debate and legislating by representatives of all citizens. It would become a government of absolute power without checks on that power, contrary to what the founders had intended. Judge Kavanaugh must recognize the place in American history he holds. That is too much power for one man or woman. Judge Kavanaugh should decline the position.
I’ve read enough; he served the prosecution of Bill Clinton and was on the Bush payroll during the Florida recount.
That is all anyone should need to know.
Dems should send just 1 Senator to the hearings. During floor vote, Dems should be conveniently back in their states prepping for mid terms. It is a forgone conclusion this will be the next Justice.
All through 2015/2016, I was telling anyone and everyone that this election was not a battle between DJT and HRC. It was a battle for the Supreme Court. I was right.
4
I have neither a wedding or education fund for either of my daughters. I am however building their Reproductive Freedom Fund. A nice pile of money to use for elective tubal ligation, elective abortion, birth control, family planning and overall fertility independence. I now actively promote the child free life. Because I know, there's no point in allowing them to imagine a future where they would be dependent on society, the weighted will of men, it seems, to make decisions about a woman's body, whether a women's elective care and comfort is supported by insurance like VIAGRA is covered. I could care less about legacy and family formation, just that my girls will have the financial freedom to one day buy autonomy over their body.
4
A fine choice. A highly respected and fair man. The partisan gripes will be sharp but he is a very solid choice for anyone with intellectual honesty.
4
I'm not a Constitutionalist, let alone an American Constitutionalist, but I wouldn't draw any firm conclusions about Judge Kavanaugh's legal acumen on the basis of the short quotation provided from one of his dissenting legal opinions: "The Framers lodged full responsibility for the executive power in a President of the United States, who is elected by and accountable to the people."
It seems to me that the President is elected by and accountable to an Electoral College. Happily, the Electoral College usually, but not always, tracks the will of the people. If it did, Trump would not be President.
17
"Judge Kavanaugh indicated that environmental policy should be decided by Congress rather than the courts."
Bravo. The reason why Supreme Court nominations have become so vitally important is because justices have arrogated to themselves decisions on questions which should be decided by the legislative branch. If you don't like how Congress decides questions, elect different members.
9
Legislation through litigation is what started the push for a conservative legal establishment. Liberals were relying on the unaccountable courts to advance their causes rather than the democratic legislative framework already in place to do so. The current situation is the end result of the conservative backlash to that overreach, and the pendulum now swings the other way, for better or worse.
1
Well said
Would Kavanaugh also conclude that GOLFING presidents should not be distracted by civil suits or criminal proceedings?
Trump golf count since inauguration: 125 days on the course - or 22% of his presidency - at a cost of tens of millions of dollars to taxpayers.
27
I am pulling back from the social media and political bullhorn which is Trump. Vote, march, support strong state government. I have no idea how this will end.
14
“Whether the Constitution allows indictment of a sitting president is debatable,” Judge Kavanaugh wrote in a 1998 law review article.
Is there no crime [ murder] for which a sitting president can not be indicted and prosecuted.
Spiro Agnew was Nixon's vice president.
He was still taking bribes when he was vice president.
H e had to resign to escape jail time.
14
"working on . . . legal issues arising from the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks"
Look there for potential issues. The Dubya lawyers who worked on those issues have been discredited and shamed. That is the group that created Gitmo and the torture program.
23
Well, Michigan Bernie or Busters, elections have consequences. You do remember that Hillary fought for the health benefits and other support of 9/11 first responders when others didn’t, do you? Trump only claimed damages to one of his buildings...
3
It wasn't bad enough that Trump collaborated (he hates the word collusion) with Russians to win the election -- how many Trump people met with Russians before the election, which Trump people couldn't remember any of those meetings -- but Republicans have to prop Trump up and allow him to tear down all our institutions.
What a joke America has become in just over 525 days.
32
So confident is he that his selection will be confirmed by the senate Mr. Trump has already mailed in the official documentation to have Melania's name legally changed to "Ofdonald." The rest of us might soon be compelled to follow suit.
8
"He concluded that sitting presidents should not be distracted by civil suits or criminal proceedings."
The rest is just noise, really.
Keeping this POTUS out of jail is Job 1 for this SCOTUS.
76
Too bad Kavanaugh wasn't around for the Clinton Impeachment. President Clinton couldda gotten tons more done.
Kavanaugh was part of the Clinton impeachment process - and is infamous for wanting to ask Clinton the lewdest questions of the proceedings. But in 2009, he reversed his opinion with the quote above - that presidents should not be distracted by civil suits and criminal proceedings while in office - THAT'S why Trump wants him.
Argh...we knew it would happen but who could be ready for this. He sounds slightly more complex than the woman, so maybe there is a minute glimmer of hope. The line that includes "abortion on demand" is a dog whistle for anti-choice folks so I doubt the wisdom of much hope. Really, can you imagine a pregnant woman "demanding" an abortion? We are so grateful the possibility exists and recognize the fragility of the right that we would not demand it of the wonderful people who provide abortions from the goodness of their hearts.
thank you to the providors for the help while we still have rights.
24
So Mr. Kavanaugh thinks that sitting presidents shouldn’t be subject to investigations. Wonder why Trump chose this guy as his nominee.
83
Ha! Wonder no more.
I'm curious about the conservative Catholics on the Supreme Court. Having been raised Catholic and coming from a long line of Roman Catholics, it's curious to me that the justices who are Catholic do not have large families. Therefore, they must be fantastically good at Natural Family Planning (which most Catholics do NOT use) or they avail themselves of contraception, which most Catholics have used or currently use. And, Catholic women represent about a quarter of patients who have abortions (Guttmacher, 2014). Roberts has two children and Alito, also 2. Kennedy, who is retiring, has 3. Sotomayer (not a conservative) has no children and Thomas has one biological child and is divorced from his first wife. The natural consequences of unprotected sexual relations would be many more children, yet all of these Catholic justices have few children. In contrast, my ancestors just two generations ago, had 7, 10, and 13 children in some cases. It just makes no sense to me that they toe the line on the conservative agenda, but do not fit the profile of true conservative Catholics themselves.
58
Justice Scalia had nine children.
How is this relevant to his service as Supreme Court Justice ?
There is no longer any need to appeal to the Supreme Court. The outcome is already known.
China is on the verge overtaking the United States. Way to go GOP!
31
Hence America First and tarrifs.
Ken Starr, Bush v. Gore, legal issues post-9/11. Second Amendment, "religious freedom," campaign finance. Vigorous opinions hostile to administrative agencies ("the administrative state", cf. S. Bannon). Dissented on upholding the structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Dissented from a decision upholding President Barack Obama’s health care law. Some resume, indeed. Ugh.
49
Oh, how interesting that Trump picked someone who says its "debatable" whether the constitution allows for the indictment of a sitting president.
51
This nomination has nothing to do with conservatism.
He was picked to protect Trump against an indictment if the result of Mueller’s investigation is decided by the Supreme Court.
88
Totally agree... the ME in aMErica that POTUS stands for... He first...we, well... (they really don't care.. do we?)
1
"He concluded that sitting presidents should not be distracted by civil suits or criminal proceedings."
And there we have the sole reason Trump picked him.
60
No. Collins and Murkowski understand the clear and present danger this guy presents.
Besides, the Mitchell Rule obtains, so no hearings until after the November election. Full stop.
21
I am appalled by this nomination, though of course not surprised, as I am appalled, though not surprised, by everything Trump does. Having said that, I am disturbed to find a thread of anti-Catholic sentiment in some of the opposition to him. Folks, don't go down that road - that way lies bigotry.
12
XXX,
If you're appalled at what 45 "does", it's because he CHOOSES to do those things.
I'm appalled that there are people in the 21st Century who think you can gain eternal life by drinking grape juice and eating a cracker, and think someone can die and come back to life or walk on water.
I have no problem with someone thinking, inside their head, inane things (things I believed when "I thought as a child," to paraphrase Paul).
But when grownups who have had the benefit of science education continue to believe in sky fairies and use those beliefs to legislate or rule from the bench, then I have a problem.
Bigotry is when someone is hated for things they have no control over--gender, skin color, country they're from.
You may have been RAISED Catholic but you weren't BORN Catholic. You can pull yourself out of that belief system if you choose to.
So don't call anyone a bigot because they have a problem with people who have a fundamentalist religious worldview and are pushing their belief system on the rest of us.
@XXX
Not bigotry. We need diverse backgrounds and views on SCOTUS. Yale, Harvard, Catholics and Jews are over-represented on SCOTUS. US is diverse. How about more mid-west or west nominees? Sandra Day O'Connor was from Arizona.
1
It’s a great day in America. Trump delivering on another promise. It’s so weird seeing a politician actually doing what he said he would do. We’ll easily keep the senate and Trump will win in a landslide in 2020. America is back!
20
You must get very lonely in Portland... (BTW: Didn't Trump also promise health care for all at low LOW premiums? When does he deliver on that one?)
39
I think this is a new promise that is related to his promise that he could commit murder on 5th Avenue and no lose a vote. This promise is that he could destroy democracy, sell the office of the presidency to a foreign enemy and not be indicted or prosecuted. If that is the promise he seems well on his way to fulfilling it. And we have his supporters to thank for that.
1
America is back? For whom? The "promises made" was a charade to his base, while the "promises kept" is for the corporate and foreign entities he owes so that he can live as apprentice POTUS. The candidate selected for SCOTUS is once again not reflective of America as INTENDED.
2
When Judge Kavanaugh previously concluded that sitting presidents should not be distracted by civil suits or criminal proceedings, he was referring to presidents who actually work at the job and not a president who hardly works at all and already is constantly distracted by what happens to be on television or by what's trending on Twitter. If and when Judge Kavanaugh is faced with the issue of whether Donald Trump should be the subject of criminal proceedings while he is in the oval office, I'm confident that the Judge will be practical and realize that a person who is in a constant state of distraction need not be protected from one more possible source of distraction.
34
Progressives and liberals must admit that a Republican President is not going to nominate a liberal to a Supreme Court seat. This is why elections - and not just for the office of the President-have consequences. Had Mr. Obama had a Democratically controlled Senate, Merrick Garland would be on the court and this appointment would be slightly less consequential. As it is, Judge Kavanaugh was probably the least offensive of the list presented. I do not believe there is any way this nomination will be blocked. Kavanaugh probably can assuage Murkowski and Collins enough so they believe he won't overturn Roe. I think there is a good chance 2-3 Democrats up for re-election in heavily Republican states will vote for him as well. I just wish someone would recognize there are people available that aren't educated at Yale or Harvard. And except for Sandra Day O'Connor, I can't think of anyone from West of the Mississippi River either. The Court doesn't reflect the full experiences and backgrounds of the nation - I find that a bit troubling, and this nomination does nothing to start correcting that.
77
Yes but we do not like middle class voters having votes that can be bought with unlimited advertising dollars based on Citizens United, a recent Supreme Court decision led by the conservatives. We think it destroys democracy by letting rich people control the elections, and that it is not "conservative" to let unlimited money taint elections. This is not just about social issues, this is the end of the middle class. The tax break money went mostly to the rich and to the corporations whose stock they own, while the debt is accumulating to every man woman and child in the US which is mostly middle class and poor class. I think we are being swindled by the decisions of this "conservative" Supreme Court.
27
West of the Mississippi? Though Kennedy went to Harvard, he was born in Sacramento and practiced law there before being appointed to the (far west) Ninth Circuit. I think he can fairly be said to have been from California.
1
Sandra Day is not even on the court anymore.
He'll easily be confirmed because he is thoughtful, careful and competent. Those who say is an ideologue either haven't read his opinions or do not understand them. Not every aspect of life involves a constitutional question, although law schools since the early 70's have taught "constitutionalize everything." Separation of powers is the essential attribute of our system, and on the one hand, courts should not legislate, while on the other hand, courts should not abdicate to the executive or legislative branches. That approach is what makes Kavanaugh (and Gorsuch and Roberts) so vital to an honest judiciary. With Congress so willing to abdicate to the executive, we need someone on the USSC who will call it straight regarding the federal government's obligations. No one person can reverse a USSC order. Despite the claims of right wing ideology, Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch, and next Kavanaugh, are more honorable and intellectually honest than they are given credit for. Roe v. Wade is a remarkable opinion regarding individual autonomy and freedom from government regulation. Don't sell the so-called conservative wing of the USSC short regarding freedom from government regulation. The only thing they are really conservative about is respect for the limited role of the judicial branch and the 10th Amendment.
44
Gimme a break. Roberts, Alito (and, of course, Thomas) have already ruled against freedom of reproductive choice by virtue of allowing some draconian state restrictions to go forward. As soon as some right-wing misogynist files a suit that goes all the way to the SCOTUS, Roe will almost assuredly be overturned.
25
The SCOTUS justices obviously can't read the part of the Constitution that says guns can only be owned by private citizens in the setting of a well regulated militia.
Or that the government should "promote the general welfare", like providing social security to elderly who paid whatever they were asked to pay in payroll deductions for decades of their working lives, what Paul Ryan calls an "entitlement" that must be scaled back. Have you ever tried to live off of social security, it is ALREADY scaled back, we would be ignoring the general welfare if we scaled it back in order to pay for a tax cut to the richest 10% of americans like we did.
22
"Female reproductive choice" is not the only issue every one is worried about. This fixation on Roe v Wade is getting tiresome. And I don't think any judge will over turn this given the way courts have ruled in the past. The people clearly don't want it done.
He doesn't really appear to be any more conservative than Kennedy, to be honest. And he acknowledges anthropogenic climate change; he's not an insane ideologue like Gorsuch. Still an ideologue but he at least understands what nuance is. It's hard to see him endorsing an outright reversal of Roe or Hodges.
But that's never been the danger. Death by a thousand cuts: it's how they killed the VRA, McCain-Feingold, the ACA, and it is how they will cut off access to legal abortion. No doubt this guy will be a reliable vote to that end; but then, so was Kennedy.
It could have been much worse.
20
I have always found the "originalist" position to be highly problematic. It presumes to get into the minds of men (all men) who lived in a far different world and could not even have begun to imagine ours. It assumes that what they viewed as right functioning for the small, new nation they founded is right for a nation of well over 300 million people which is a world power. It seems to hold those men up as prescient gods, which they were not.
If confirmed, it will take decades to know whether Mr. Kavanaugh is a good pick for the right-wing. Justices have disappointed in the past. That said, it is troubling to have an increasing number of members of the SCOUTS firmly focused on the 'found fathers'' view of how the Constitution should be interpreted.
27
Thank you for your comment. I wholly agree!