When the NYTimes calls Free Speech a weapon, I'm glad to see a new justice who believes in free speech.
Liberal intolerance and hatred of diversity of ideas needs a champion.
The right is causing the Constitution to lose its legitimacy in the eyes of the majority, anyway. Two out of five Presidential elections go to the loser, one of them determined by the court itself. A Senate that is inherently gerrymandered, far more than any individual state could ever gerrymander its House seats - and that is plenty of gerrymandering all by itself. Now a Congress that upholds a President who is widely recognized - including, frankly, by that very Congress - as a foreign intelligence asset, which is a nice way of saying, a traitor. A President who does everything he can to kill a criminal investigation of the wrongdoing everyone knows about anyway, and a Congress that helps him do that. A President who nominates a Supreme Court judge whose pre-eminent qualification is that he believes that Presidents can't be sued or prosecuted. A Supreme Court nominee who makes obviously false sycophantic statements about the President on the very occasion of his nomination. And above all, a President who lies, lies, lies, lies, lies. We can all read the Federalist Papers until we are blue in the face, and some of have. It sounds good on paper, and it had its moments in history, for sure, but this is our reality today. The Constitution is almost, as Justice Scalia would have said, though not with his intended meaning, a dead document. To the far right - misnamed as conservatives - I say, doctor, your operation has been a success, but you have killed the patient.
2
Leonard Leo of the Federalist society has mainly been responsible for placing Justices Alito, Roberts and Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. He headed Trump's team for the current pick of Kavanaugh, Leo and other right wing organizations are backed by the dark money of the Koch Brothers and Mercers and have been successful in turning the United States into a plutocracy. These billionaire scoundrels achieved this transition with Trump as the front puppet and pr man through a massive propaganda campaign not seen since Nazi Germany.
5
America has Jim Crowed its less fortunate citizens as policy for 240 years while touting its sacred Constitution. Women couldn't even vote until 1920. It allows a parade of machine gun deaths in the name of freedom, had to be forced into giving basic rights to Blacks fully 100 years post Civil War and then constantly has walked them back by gerrymander, voter restrictions, over-arrests, etc. It hates on LGBT for sport. It selects cash over citizens almost every time. The list of exclusionary and oily policies is pitiable and endless. This justice is simply another well fed whitebread inbred who will use all his wit to delimit civil rights with a wink and a nod to central authority and religion. Kneel before your masters America.
4
Another NYT piece today cites Guttmacher.org, which maps out that most states between the Northeast and West Coast have gutted Roe at least as much as it allows. But if they think it works for them, let's not over-impose our "elite" values any more than I care for the reverse.
I tend toward choice because RVW is also about reality. After she was hit by a car, doctors told my mom she could not conceive; my parents weren't young either. But in Catholicism, a penis has two roles; pleasure isn't one. So strictly speaking, my parents--and you'd be hard pressed to find better--failed big-time in bringing about their "miracle baby." Dad was as true a gentleman from another era as they were. If he couldn't reign it in after 40 and four kids, then I have to hold the social perfection of the Christian Nation suspect. Per one dating site, Utah leads with a whopping 20% of its users self-identifying as virgins.
Because of the other 80%, I also think public schools like my own have to go beyond PP and being "sexperts," and educate kids about the financial and emotional drain than comes with teen abortions, and yes, the gore and dangers associated with late ones. Watched a show on abortions in Britain, and these doctors didn't seem like profit-driven killers at all. But as much as they believed in what they did, the later the procedure, clearly the less comfortable they were doing it.
Why did so many Americans not understand voting for the lesser of two evils in Nov 2016? Unless you're in the 1%, you are not a neutral and insulated observer from politics with the luxury of staying home on Election Day or voting third-party. This comes down to public education not teaching Civics and Political Science 101 well enough.
I'm laughing darkly at liberals who are pointing the blame at the DNC/HRC for this mess in 2016. Of course they are partly responsible for this by not campaigning in the Rust Belt more, holding debates during NFL games, etc.
At the end of the day, it's you the voters and your descendants who pay the price for not having voted in 2016. It's unfair not to have real choices, I get it. But how does refusing to support a corporate-friendly Democrat Party of today help you and your loved on the issues that affect you like healthcare bills, clean air and water, or workplace discrimination? Because the only other choice is Republicans, who are MUCH more anti-worker/anti-99% than the Dems?
2
Republicans want to have this fight about abortion rights this fall to distract the American people as they gut Social Security and Medicare to pay for Trump's Trickle Down Tax Cuts.
4
A fight “unlike any we have seen.” Instead, lots of wasted time, money, and shrieking followed by a confirmation. At least many Democratic Senators will be able to pound their chests. Nothing will come of the time, the money, the shrieking , and the chest pounding,
Years ago, I was an usher in e wedding party. The fix was in on the toss of the bouquet. It was to go to the bride's best friend. All of the also-ran ladies were to stand directly behind the bride, and the friend stood a few feet away from them. The bride tossed the boquet with a hook shot toss at her friend. Unfortunately, the friend was by then a bit tipsy. She reached out to catch it. but fell off her high heels, missed the bouquet, and landed on her keister.
Little did I know then that I was witnessing a parable of the 2016 Democrats nomination process and the following election.
For the lack of a winning candidate the election was lost, and for losing the election the Supreme Court was lost. There are times when you can send a weak player into a game for feel good purposes, but a Presidential election was not such a time.
3
If winning means putting someone like Donald Trump on the ticket to represent you I would prefer to lose with honor and integrity.
Oddly enough, this mess arises from both Mitch McConnell's refusal to give Merrick Garland a fair hearing and Debbie Wasserman Schultz's refusal to give Bernie Sanders a fair hearing. Extremists have brought us hear and should be disdained by all who care for this country; whose government is designed to work by compromise.
8
Which is why the SC Chamber of Commerce asked their lawmakers to stop the tariffs at any cost...because they are so happy with the winning.
Republicans denied (a twice and popularly elected) Obama’s rightful nominee even a hearing.
Now they have a very possibly fraudulent president seeking his own protection while they engage in a coverup on his behalf.
Democrats are helpless and pathetic.
For those who don’t want America to turn into Russia, Turkey or the Philippines, it’s time to protest in the streets on a massive and noisy scale.
MAGA = Malevolent, Arrogant, Greedy, Amoral
5
A complete waste of money and energy. The Democratic leaders know they have zero, and I do mean zero chance of stopping Kavanaugh from being confirmed. He is highly qualified and in fact has little that can be criticized in his past decisions. There is no chance that Collins or Murkowski will vote no, and highly likely that 3 Democrats will also vote to confirm.
This is a political show which the Democrats have deluded themselves into thinking will energize their base, but in fact it will just confirm to them that their leaders have failed them miserably. And in fact it will energize Republicans that will be disgusted by this circus and the name calling and hysterics emanating from the progressive wing of the party who actually represent the opinions of a minority of Americans. Elections have consequences, Republicans won. Democrats put Kagan and Sotomyer in, hardly moderates. The President ran on his promise to put conservatives on the court and he is keeping that promise. He has every right to do so.
6
why not after November 6, 2018? You know, after the people speak in an election.
1
.looking into the near future... Amy Coney Barrett would look good in the RBG seat.
3
The Democratic Party -- as an organization -- is such a pathetic disappointment. Trump and his Republican enablers are systematically undermining and destroying the fundamental underpinnings of our democracy. Meanwhile, the best the Democratic Party can do is react to SCOTUS nominations and come up with vapid slogans like "a better deal."
2
Of course if Trump had actually won the election, voices might be more muted. Instead, the party favored by a minority of Americans is pushing its extreme agenda while claiming to have a mandate.
6
Voting for Third Party Candidate is a Waste of Time
Are all of you people who voted for Jill Stein and Gary Johnson happy with the result of your vote? Is this situation what you voted for?
In 2016 in MI, PA, and WI you folks all voted in larger numbers for EACH of Stein and Johnson than the margin by which the doofus won each state. Here are the numbers:
State Trump Beat HRC by Johnson Stein
MI 10,704 172,136 51,463
PA 44,292 146,715 49,941
WI 22,748 106,674 31,072
Nobody knows, or cares, that any of you voted as a "protest" or because "there is no difference between Hillary and Trump."
10
Waste of time by coward Democrat politicians who cannot get their act together to work on getting a majority in Congress to impeach Trump, and who pull useless stunts instead.
This is a losing battle for the Democrats. He is highly qualified and will be confirmed. Considering the Democratic majority in the House' and Senate's past, I've always found it somewhat dishonest that issues like abortion have not found their way into legislation. If at some point SCOTUS moves abortion to the states then the Democrats have nothing but themselves to blame. The fact that Roe vs. Wade ever came about was through judicial overreach. This should always have been handled legislatively not through judicial activism.
4
One point that many miss is there has been at least a generation and a half since Roe was decided. In that time, the role of women has dramatically changed.
2
This is a great outcome. Could probably do with one more right-leaning judge to protect sanity and reverse some of the crazy recent decisions.
5
We're now at the point where the Democrats are not even pretending they will give a Republican nominee an honest hearing. Which party has the closed mind now?
4
And the Republicans refused to give an Obama nominee any kind of hearing - fair or not. The Republicans stole the seat. They should not be surprised at the backlash.
1
I can’t believe R’s have the nerve to complain about “not getting a fair hearing” after what they did to Merrick Garland. Shameless hypocrites. D’s need to learn how to fight. Deference and cooperation has gotten us nothing except a country controlled by R’s, even though a majority of the population agrees more with D positions!
1
Someone who is willing to accept a Supreme Court position at the invitation of Trump is utterly unworthy to serve on the said institution. Self respecting professionals should not associate with this imperial court, if they have any hope of surviving it.
5
I guess all the anti-HRC democratic party voters that stayed home didn't think that all the way through. How about that? Elections have consequences.
6
Checks and Balances 2.0 and "judicial incrementalism" (SCOTUS composition): https://www.fundamentalreform.org/
How we appoint Justices to the Supreme Court and maintain them on it needs fundamental reform.
Life tenure for SCOTUS Justices injects unnecessary uncertainty, risk, and, ultimately, polarization into our political process; and each of these negative aspects will intensify as life expectancy increases in the coming years.
The ideal for our representative democracy is that no majority (conservative, liberal, or other) can disproportionately impact the political direction of the country. Life tenure for US Supreme Court Justices all but guarantees this will happen.
Please go to Checks and Balances 2.0 at https://www.fundamentalreform.org/ and read about the checks and balance that “judicial incrementalism” would provide.
2
The idea is to get a lot of people to call their Senators and tell them what that person wants. Get enough call made, and that could pressure a Senator to vote a particular way.
Kavanaugh is a very capable and strong candidate. Republicans have the votes. The swing voters look comfortable with him. It's not a real fight. It's just another Hatfield vs. McCoy partisan battle. A big waste of time. Won't change anything.
4
During my life I have voted both for democrats and republicans but in more recent years have concluded that Republicans tend to be much more mature in their approach to government. For example, Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg’s nomination was approved by a senate vote of 97 to 3. Contrast that with the current childish attitude of Democrats over the Kavanaugh nomination: it reminds me of a child who throws a temper tantrum because she can’t have everything go her way. What she needs is a good trouncing and I believe the Democrats should prepare for the good trouncing coming their way in November.
11
Childish? Were you watching when Mitch McConnell refused to give Merrick Garland a hearing?
10
And McConnell was the adult in the room when he refused even to meet Garland much less grant him an interview. Garland was the sort of jurist who won praise from Republicans who wished he were the kind of jurist Obama would nominate.
What fight? Republicans have everything now....US no longer progressive country.
World alienation and dumping on allies.
Trade war sending Trump Country into job pitfall.
A nation about to be ripped apart by a conservative court ready to reward corporate interests and deny the health and choice of women.
Is this what you really wanted, Trumpers?
4
Over the next few months, it expects to spend more than $10 million to promote Judge Kavanaugh — part of a battle royale between conservative and liberal interest groups that will last all summer and into fall, costing tens of millions of dollars.
Brought to you courtesy of Citizens United, the single worst SCOTUS ruling in the history of the US,
7
@ Dude
To answer your questions
1. Motherhood is a form of enslavement if a woman does not choose to be pregnant and is prevented from terminating a pregnancy, thus forced to carry a child to term and then raise it against her will. Dudes would not ask questions like this if they could get pregnant, or if so many didn't easily ignore parental responsibilities.
2. Abortion is a universal phenomenon, practiced throughout recorded history in most cultures, and also, based on archaeological evidence, practiced in pre-historic times.
3. Your third comment is incoherent. My attempted translation is that you "get" or understand the reason for abortion in cases of rape or incest, but aren't certain about the right to abortion if the pregnancy wasn't "forced"? The right answer: It's the woman's body and therefore the woman's choice -- and therefore none of your business!
(What is "etc"? I hope it means that if the life of the mother is threatened by continuing the pregnancy, you would also understand the need for abortion)
You didn't ask, but: In colonial America, abortion was legal, probably following the English rule of no prohibitions on abortion until the time of quickening (about 20 weeks). But it was kept secret for the most part, as premarital sex was frowned upon.
Restricting and eventually criminalizing abortion in America began sometime in the late 1800s.
You have a right to question when or if an abortion is appropriate when or if you can get pregnant.
Kavanaugh taught at Harvard Yale and Georgetown
Perfect crendtials
Center right not far right
He will be confirmed.
So why the fuss only to lose?
7
Couldn’t agree more.
2
November 6, 2018. An election. If the Senate flips, guess who has a much harder time getting other nominees confirmed.
2
We must hope for a Democratic president in 2020 and an early retirement, impeachment, or death of one of the Republicans on the court.
3
People of Maine - when Susan Collins runs recognize like the allegedly reform 19th century Republican club, she will always be a Mugwamp with her Mug on one side of the fence and her Wamp on the other.
2
That liberal strategy is bound to fail. Only massive personal attacks and questioning K’s character have a chance.
1
Scotus has never been and never will be free of "politics". Please vote to control the other two branches.
2
someday the evidence of how trump threatened Kennedy's son will emerge. and what did Kennedy's sin do? laundered Russian money for trump.
8
This over 70 white guy says: Take away people's rights at your peril.
I have a wife, two daughters, a daughter-in-law, and two granddaughters. If you mess with their rights, you are also messing with me. And my son. And my two sons-in-law. And my two grandsons.
But let me ask all of the "pro-life" folks a simple question:
Who gave YOU the right to butt into the medical issues of a person you do not know, and with whom you have no personal relationship?
You want to butt into MY medical issues? FIRST SHOW ME ALL OF YOUR MEDICAL RECORDS. (And then you can get lost.)
The same logic would apply if you want to butt into the medical issues of the women in my family.
Now let’s make it a little more specific:
If a fetus and a mom are both healthy, and everything goes normally, is it your business to interject yourself? Normal people would say “NO.” Even “pro-lifers” would have no argument with that. Why is that particular situation any of YOUR business? (It isn’t.)
If there is a problem of some kind, and one or both of the mom and the fetus are having medical issues, why do you think YOU should be allowed to participate in the medical issues that the mom and the fetus have (and be allowed to control them)?
Just answer that for me please.
7
What a waste if money. Kavanaugh will be confirmed easily and there is nothing the Dems can do about it. Too bad for them Hillary didn’t campaign in Michigan or Wisconsin.
3
Strategy suggestion to the left. Forget about Kavanaugh, no matter how much money is spent,how much effort applied, this nomination is not going to be stopped. Take the money and energy and concentrate on a good showing in November. I mean a really good show. Take the house, make some progress in the Senate. Then, just maybe Trumps next SCOTUS pick, and I'm predicting another, won't increase the Conservative stranglehold on the Supreme Court from 20+ years to 30-40.
3
Sens. Collins, Murkowski and other decent, courageous, patriotic Republicans who are not cowed by Trump must search their conscience. Act on behalf of the American people, our Constitution and nation. Refuse to be bullied by the thug who lives only for the time being in the White House.
3
He'll be confirmed 56-43.
11
Just wanted to say again, cause I cannot find my original
comment, there is no battle, it is all show. The corporate Democrats are only obeying their big donors. They only care about getting rich by these donors. They do not care about us regular folks. The big donors, the oligarchs must want this guy
on the Supreme Court and they have ordered the corrupt Dems to stand down, while making a big show of a fight to fool the voters. Do not send these corporate democrats your hard earned and diminishing money to help them fight the GOP. It will only go into their pockets. They are paid to lose lately. Only vote for progressives and yes the socialist democrats who will not be bought and take only small donations and have been smeared by every corrupt politician.
Too bad it will cost us millions to watch a badly performed show. How the corrupt Dems must laugh at our blindness and our sad faith that they will save us. The GOP is horrible but at least they are blatant about their agenda.
4
And you all know all these things that will be done away with by one man, just how? The entire rest of the Supreme Court has not just been waiting to over-turn decades old rulings. They haven't in the past, and this nominee, if confirmed, will not change that.
Much of this is based on the fact that Judge Kavanaugh is a Roman Catholic. Didn't we get over thinking that the Pope was going to be calling the shots on everything when JFK ran and won the Presidency 60 years ago?
What an absurd waste of money. Just think what that kind of money could do to help with poverty and education! If we continue to operate like this, we may well bring down the Republic.
8
Dear Judge Kavanaugh,
I enjoyed watching your fine performance the other night in which you assured the American people that you are a common, ordinary, decent American citizen, and not a part of the governing elite, with a loving wife, two loving daughters and that you look to hire as many women law clerks and blacks as you can and otherwise are a good guy.
The problem I have is that you are being appointed to the Court by a President who lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes and is now busily engaged in tearing the country apart.
I hope you will appreciate my quandary concerning your suitability for the Court and would appreciate receiving your answers to the following five questions to give me a better idea of the type of man you are.
I already have a pretty good idea of who you are, so simple yes or no answers will do.
1. Do you believe women possess the right to receive ordinary, well recognized medical treatments from their doctors without interference by the State?
2. Do you believe that Corporations and rich people have the right to purchase as much political advertising as their money can buy?
3. Do you believe that illegal migrants are human beings and possess the right to be treated as such?
4. Are Presidents entitled to shoot a person down on Fifth Avenue while still remaining President?
5. Do you believe that Judge Garland received a fair shake from the Republican Party?
With great thanks in advance for your quick response.
Stanton
8
Garland? Garland or a Lei. Throw a colorful one over his neck and stick a fork in him. He's done.
1
He thought it would be better hiding in Alice's rabbit hole and asking Humpty Dumpty what to do now, no now, no now.....now.
May I humbly ask: what exactly did you expect?
7
Um, a battle? For what? To see how fast the Democrats can roll over? There is no battle. The GOP has a complete grip over all three branches of government and most governorships. It's done. There is no battle. Democrats are living in a fantasy world and that's what got us in this mess. The fantasy that Jill Stein or Ralph Nader are viable candidates. The fantasy that taking a moral stand with your vote will change the world. Wake up. Take a minute a realize that we live in a republic democracy with an electoral college. My palm is permanently attached to my forehead. We need some real moderate left leadership and fast. What a vacuum. Trump will get his pick and probably one more. Wake. Up.
12
I don't understand why money will be spent on advertisements. The only people with a vote are senators and possibly Pence.
3
Just as Republicans have done in the past , it is now the Democrats turn to use complete demagoguery to whip their base into a terrified frenzy. I will go on record by counter-predicting that not one - not one- of the apocalyptic events they predict will happen. Roe v Wade will NOT be overturned. LGBT rights will NOT be threatened. Immigrants will NOT be cast into dungeons or
rounded up by the millions for deportation. The Affordable Care Act will NOT be declared unconstitutional. The world will not end.
And, though they will never admit it, the Democratic leadership ( as has the Republican leadership in the past)
does not for a second believe the hysteria they inflame. They know that precedents will not be wantonly overruled. They know that the terror they are inciting is unfounded. And they know the nominee will be confirmed.
So why do this ? - to whip people into a frenzy so they will vote Democratic. They have to do this - because they offered no constructive issues on which to run.
They will desperately cling to the minority vote. Yet they have done nothing - nothing ! - to advance the cause of any of those living in impoverished, segregated areas. So, instead of offering people hope and courage, they scare them. And sadly, their fear tactics will work and not one of our many problems will be an inch closer to solution.
When you have nothing else - terrify the masses.
5
This is a waste of time. Republicans at every turn have out maneuvered Democrats and they will win this battle easily with those red state Democrats voting with McConnell and his gang. Republicans win elections and wield their power with sledgehammer efficiency. Democrats sign petitions and tell us the world is ending. Remember we are at this point because Democrats lost an election that should not even have been close, and now we all suffer the consequences.
8
Old time lawyer as I am, I'll wager one dollar that both will recuse themselves if a legal decision arises with Trump at its center.
3
It is wrong for the subject of a criminal investigation to pick the judges in his own case.
5
To what end? To make Trump pick someone else in the fall? I understand the frustration that Trump is president. I understand the gut reaction to oppose him. But then what? What’s the best case scenario if this nomination gets blocked? I don’t understand what people hope comes next.
5
"It will be a battle unlike any we have seen in history."
Why? What do Democrats have to gain?
Judge Kavanugh is a mainstream conservative. His credentials are solid. As solid, if not more so, than many Justices on the Court. Thirty years ago he would have sailed through. At some point the arms race between Left and Right facts has to end. Why not now?
10
If you are represented by a Rep. senator respectfully contact their office by all means possible repeatedly and tell them that although this may not be their election year when it comes up you and all of your group are of long memory and don't forgive some transgressions. Get all in your circle to act as well.
3
On the one hand I am saddened by how tribal our politics has become. This tribalism has bled into the Supreme Court, an institution that should be completely devoid of such a bias-inducing force. Yet I also find myself wanting the democrats to fight as hard as they can against Kavanaugh's placement on the Court. Trump selected him to overturn Roe. Trump selected him because he has publicly stated that sitting presidents should not be subject to criminal investigation. This justice could help to shield Trump from the law. Trump has an approval rating in the low 40's and lost the popular vote by over 3 million. He doesn't represent what Americans want, but he's about to reshape our laws for generations. It's not right, and so in this case I want the democrats to fight and obstruct. Resist.
3
It wasn't Bernie's fault. It was Debbie Wasserman and the Democratic party who selected Hillary over Bernie. Sanders would have been elected president by popular and electoral votes.
7
How could he get elected when Mrs. Clinton wiped the floor with him in actual votes?
Some 20 years ago, Hillary Rodham Clinton warned us that there is a vast right wing conspiracy. She is a prophet.
8
The unions are fighting for inclusion of health care in benefits for workers. But the Supreme Court just weakened the unions with a recent ruling. With fewer jobs carrying health care benefits, giving the insurance companies more room to charge more, means that all those middle class and working class Republicans will have to pay for their own healthcare. OK now, but when the deficit spending (resulting from the tax cut to wealthy people and wealthy corporations) leads to higher interest rates, there will be a recession, and then the working class will have less jobs AND less healthcare. We on the coasts will watch them suffer and we will be sad.
6
Democrats were warned on numerous occasions that the future of the Supreme Court was at stake in the 2016 election, yet many voted for Stein or Johnson, or refrained from voting altogether. And here we are, discussing what will ultimately be a fruitless attempt to forestall the confirmation of the Court's fifth conservative vote.
Further, given that Justices Ginsburg and Breyer will be turning 86 and 81, respectively, in August, Trump may not be finished reshaping the Court during his first term.
So, going into November's mid-term elections, Democrats would do well to remember President Obama's admonition to all those attending (or watching) the 2016 Democratic convention: "Don't boo. Vote." Then again, given what transpired in 2016, perhaps the message should now be: "Don't boo. Don't whine. Vote Democrat."
13
VM,
You left out the kicker that sealed HRC's loss. (Besides HRC and her campaign itself...)
The 12 million Dino's that flipped and voted Trump.
That number shames the 0.05% ie. 1 million of Stein's voters. Of course the stay at home vote always hurts Dems.
Why is it that Democratic's always blame their Left, yet ignore or pander to their so called moderate/center Right?
But yes, VOTE~!
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/15/upshot/how-did-trump-win-over-so-many...
4
Someone please explain to me how one SCOTUS Justice that wrote in 2009, while Obama was President, that Congress should consider passing a law to delay any Presidential impeachments to after the term provides Trump any immunity today with the Mueller investigation? It doesn't, that's why.
3
Let's see, all that is needed is a simple majority and Kavanaugh is confirmed. Even with 50 votes, Pence can cast the 51st vote, that's if McCain doe snot vote or votes against the nomination. As fro hoping the two woman Senators will break ranks? Well, they helped to pass the Tax Cuts, and cuts to the ACA.
I see a lot of blame game here, by those who have sour grapes over the 2016 election. Well, thanks to "nominating" Clinton, the DNC was instrumental in getting the lowest turn out in modern political history. Not only did the lose the presidency, they also lost coat tail to gain back the Senate.
And, to t op it off, a number of people posting cite the most important issue is Roe v. Wade; nothing else matters, even gaining back the House, Senate and regaining the presidency. And, guess what? The pro choice folks just helped to keep Congress, and the White House, in GOP hands. And, the pro life folks, the RNCKoch Brothers, conservative PACs, et. al., are laughing in their smoked filled backed rooms.
The Democrats are still stuck in 2016, and are just as in a disarray now, as they were back then. The future of this nation gets dimmer every day, and what opposition, that does exist, cares more about abortion rights, than a president poised to create an authoritarian government. In such a scenario, having the right to choose, will be the least of their worries.
10
Looking back, Obama should have made Garland a recess appointment. He should have made everyone understand Russia was trying to shanghai our elections. But you have to remember, at the time it looked to everyone, myself included, like Trump would be soundly defeated. Obama wanted to maintain civility. There was no need to fight with every arrow in our quiver.
I guess we learned a few things. All-out war from now on.
11
Or we might have learned to ask ourselves how we could have been so wrong about the outcome of the elections.
2
To quote Bill Murray's character, "It just doesn't matter."
Let's stop kidding ourselves. The only way to fix this to vote.
We didn't do that. Now less than 24% of this country is running it, into the ground.
4
It'll only a fight like we've never seen if some Republican Senators die before the vote and are replaced by Democrats. That's not likely to happen.
2
Why do you bother having a SCOTUS when it’s stacked? You know the result before opinions are rendered. In my opinion, this body is not at all about justice, rather a rubber stamp on policy of the day.
2
Sure. Like everyone "knew" how the votes on ACA and gay marriage we're going to go.
3
Hello. Unlike anything we have seen in history? Bork and Thomas come to mind.
5
I ask the Republicans who support Trump and Kavanaugh, what profiteth you to take control of the Supreme Court and lose the country to Putin?
5
Democrats can fight this confirmation, and call to question Trump’s motives in protecting himself from legal action. But it should not distract progressives one iota from the real work—winning in the mid-term elections. While unlikely, a Blue Wave is our path to changing the balance of power. The Right controls the House, Senate, and White House. In the mid-terms we can change two of the three which is more important than spending important resources to fight the inevitable confirmation of this nominee. If we do not prevail in the upcoming election, it is not hard to imagine the RBG seat coming open and another nominee from The List being seated.
11
Impeachment by the House and trial in the Senate are not the only forms of prosecution; they are the first. Criminal indictment, according to the argument, cannot be undertaken without removal from office.
There is a logic to this, and I think it is what the framers intended, to protect the President against spurious prosecution by political rivals.
However, the framers likely never anticipated a criminal President, and a criminally complicit Congress. Even so, the rules set in place don't bend for a particular instance. Our remedy is impeachment, facilitated by the ballot. If we can't manage that, do we deserve better?
3
SCOTUS itself is to blame for the controversies that swirl around it due to it's tendency to legislate from the bench. I'm pro choice , but does the Constitution really specify a right to abortion? Wouldn't social harmony have been enhanced if the question were left to federal and state legislative branches of government? I support same sex marriage, but again perhaps best left to the legislature? What a panel of nine middle aged and elderly judges can impose on society presumably can be overturned by a future panel of such judges.
4
@BD
Personally I do not understand why the government is involved in any personal issues. What right does the government have to say who you can marry? What right does another have to mess around with a women's body
and her choices? Shameful.
5
The Constitution prohibits faith-based legislation. The claim that a soul is imparted at the moment of fertilization as a complete homunculus is a religions belief that cannot be respected in the law.
9
I never get an answer when I ask how and when we delegated supervision of the internal processes of our own bodies to any level of government.
2
The efforts described are essential to public participation in the review and voting process. It is entirely political, as it should be. All the interest groups and grass roots mobilization is vital to our democracy. Of course, there will be exaggeration, dishonesty, and hysteria. Do independent research of the opinions written by Kavanaugh rather than accepting what some reporter or senator or interest group says. All his opinions are available on the internet. Speculation is the worst means of persuasion. Have your say, call your senator, demonstrate on the street. Get involved. But, do your homework first so your position is based on facts rather than advertising. There is no substitute for reading the man's words.
3
Confirmation fight? Fight implies that one party or the other will emerge victorious. This confirmation process is not a fight. It's a preordained triumph for Trump. Why? Do the math. The Democrats fall short of votes and let's not presume that Collins and/or Murkowski will not fold to the pressure.
10
Isn't over? My guess this will be one of the fastest confirmations ever.
11
Democracy does NOT equal reckless rule of the marjority. I never understood how a simple majority would be sufficient for a lifetime tenure of that great importance.
Sanity can be restored with an amendment to the consitution that requires a 60% majority on all confirmations, no matter what. Compromise needs to be enshrined in the consitution to ensure democracy survives.
5
The unfairness of laws forbidding abortion lies in them forcing women to do what men are not forced to do: sacrifice their bodily freedom for the sake of another human being.
I'm not forced by law to help out at my local soup kitchen or help old folks across the street. We can't be forced to be good Samaritans.
4
My bet is that Trump will win another one. I'm not tired of winning yet, keep it up President Trump!
11
Delay. Delay. Delay.
Worked for trump. So what's the hurry? Let's let the people decide.
1
Kavanaugh... only because he will protect the president from actions that with anyone else it would be treason.
4
I haven't studied the Constitution. I do not have a law degree. It follows that if I can tell you how each one of the Supreme Court Justices is going to vote on almost any given issue, then it is all about politics and we really don't have a functioning legal system anymore.
11
Over half the Supreme Court's decisions are unanimous. The close decisions are a tiny minority. See https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/06/unanimous-supreme-court-decisions...
4
Or Thomas, for that matter.
True conservatism having qualities of caution in relating to change and innovation, with preferences towards traditional attitudes and values... but in that lays the problem, what traditions and values are being preferenced? As of now the image being presented seems to be going back to Dictatorships, Kings and Queens, Autocracies... women seem to be chattel, skin colors other than white are demeaned, religion is not a philosophy of Jesus's teaching (that were heal the sick, feed the poor, fight the money changers, treat all men/women/children equally, and teach a connection to God vs any specific religion) but it is instead a figure head not that unlike the likes of the Roman Church and its quest to dominate the world. There is a denial of law and science (yet every aspect of the conservative's lives is a product of science... can't wait till we get back to horses pulling sword born militaries around looking for a kingdom to conquer. Meanwhile Global warming IS going to destroy all life, AI is being given its reigns, War is being set up... again. Millions are going to die first or we are all going to die due to our own ignorance in dealing with the environment. Now that's what I call not wanting to take no change to the extreme... conservative.
2
A fact many seem not to realize: you cannot please everyone. Learn to sit down and discuss the differences and learn to compromise. Begin to realize others may actually have valid opinions that may differ from your own. Elected officials are supposed to do what is best for the country; not continually and basically non-stop be full time partisins.
When 100% of the votes are along party lines learn to recognize something is wrong.
1
Does the lack of "Recommend's on this post imply most are in disagreement with what is being said? If so, that is frightening and helps to explain why Washington operates the way they do. If I'm correct I assume the mess and the garbage politicians are going to continue on.
I never would have thought this.
Why for the love of all that is holy do we have to go over the top with all this talk about a conformation, see how I went over the top. Trump is the president the republicans hold the senate so Kavanaug will be confirmed. That is part of the problem with electing a man that is unqualified to run the coutrny. The other part of the problem is people that voted the man into office did not think it all the alway through. He will put people into offelcea that will move our country backward not forward. So please remember in two and a half years that your vote does matters it matter far more than you’ll ever know. Think before you vote
4
If we continually attack only one side what does that say about a country that permits freedom of thought? This whole partisanship thing is ugly at its very core.
Grow up people and learn to act civil. Learn to work with others. Realize that others have a brain besides your own chosen party. Doesn't matter if you're blue or red. Both parties have something to bring to the table. Both parties act in a very ignorant manner way too much of the time.
I'm sick of the whole thing. So childish and immature.
5
Topping the hearings over Bork? I think not.
4
I'm proud of the Democrats who have focused their opposition to Kavanaugh on principle not personality. If the tables had been turned and Hillary had made the nomination, Republicans would have come up with some conspiracy theory like Pizzagate, Birthergate, emailgate, blood libel - something idiotic. Tells us a lot about the moral and ethical fiber of the Democrats that they've focused on Kavanaugh's fitness and not some Fox News, ginned-up, conspiracy theory.
6
This is just the Farce of Gorsuch, played out again as a tragedy translated into Russian.
It is a tail no one would believe if it were a novel. A president who lies and offends more than any other public figure in history, is elected by a minority of angry right wing zealots who have stripping voter roles and gerrymandering the states for years, planning for just this moment. With the providential help of a hostile foreign power and an outdated electoral college, they grab the national leadership and against the will of the vast majority of the people, begin to install their dystopian vision at every level of our national life.
Any other minority president, elected in such fortuitous circumstances, would try to broaden his coalition, but not this one. Perhaps he and his fanatical minority are barreling ahead on every front because they understand on some level that they have a limited time to live their fantasies of remaking the nation before the reckoning comes. But like Lee at Gettysburg, like Hitler or Napoleon in Russia, overwhelming hubris must reach its nadir. The rest of us, the majority of Americans, should be secure in the knowledge that the reckoning must come.
3
It is very hard to justify voting against confirmation.
As a judge for 12 years on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Kavanagh is clearly qualified.
Just as Justices Kagan and Sotomayor were confirmed. even by many Republican senators with whom they disagreed philosophically, Kavanagh deserves conformation too.
Anything else will be seen for what it is:
Partisan fighting for the sake of partisan fighting.
If you don't like Kavanagh, then next time *you* win the presidential election.
8
Obama won his election, and with it the right to name a Justice.
When Mitch and his minions refused to even meet with Garland, did you write here that they should have a vote for Garland's confirmation?
10
You mean like Judge Garland.
6
Looking at this mess, it is hard to believe that not long ago, Supreme Court nominees were confirmed on a bipartisan basis. Even Eugene Scalia, who made no pretense about his conservative views and structural Constitutional philosophy, was confirmed 98-0 by the Senate. we seem to have lost our way. Just like Justice Scalia, Judge Kavanaugh possesses sterling credentials in terms of education and judgment to sit on the Supreme Court. Unlike Justice Scalia, the sole objections are that he is conservative nominated by a Republican President. This divisive and petty bickering verges upon damaging the judiciary. The Merrick Garland incident undoubtedly geometrically increased partisan tensions over nominations, but it is in the past. It is time to get over it. Although Judge Kavanaugh will be confirmed if necessary by a partisan vote, it is time for Democrats to reach across the aisle and recognize that elections have consequences. If they want different jurists, they have to win elections.
5
I wonder...did you write in here to say that Garland deserved the same respect from the GOP that you now insist the Democratic Party should show to Kavanaugh?
Obama, if I recall accurately, did win his election, and with it the right to nominate a Supreme Court Justice. The GOP senate refused even to meet with garland privately, 1-on-1.
Did you protest the GOP's actions at that time?
It's OK, I think I know the answer, so no need to reply.
8
I don't see what the realistic end game is for the Democrats. If they should succeed in quashing Kavanaugh's nomination, who do they think Trump would put up next, Merrick Garland? As we frequently hear repeated, elections of consequences. By any measure of education, experience and judicial temperament, Kavanaugh seems well qualified. That his interpretation of the Constitution may differ form mine or yours should not be relevant. Until recent history it was not. For those of us who find Trump an abomination, unfortunately we lost, he won. We can work to undue the damage, but we will need to live with this Supreme Court.
3
Democrats shouldn't waste too much time, effort, money, and political capital fighting a lost cause. Even if by some slim chance, Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, there is a long list of equally conservative judges waiting for the nod from the Trumpster. Does anybody really think they can prolong the process long enough for a new president or Democratic Senate? Best strategy is to use this as one of the issues to regain control of the House in 2018, win the whole Congress and presidency in 2020, and then counter the regressive Supreme Court with progressive legislation. Ultimately the people will decide whether we will have an enlightened democracy or a brutal autocracy.
3
Kavanaugh was probably the best of Trump's finalists. He seems closer to Roberts than Gorsuch, who is a right-wing ideologue.
The Senate will approve Kavanaugh with votes to spare. Every Republican will vote for him, as will several Democrats.
And he's replacing Kennedy!
Look, the answer is winning elections. In the last 50 years, the Democrats have had the White House for only 20 years, and Carter never had a chance to make a Supreme Court appointment. Yes, 2000 was close, and 2016 was close. But the Republican won. Start winning elections--the presidency, the Congress, local and state offices--and things will change.
1
The whole idea of a fixed list of judicial candidates that has been pre-vetted by interest groups and campaigned on to attract conservative votes, is, as Sen. Casey said, corrupt. It taints everyone on the list as being beholden to the President and committed to certain votes apart from the specific merits of a case It is also a tactical mistake on Trump's part. If he were smart (a big hypothetical "if" I admit) he would have kept the list confidential. Then he could have nominated somebody like Kavanaugh, who is prima facie well-qualified, with less focused resistance. Democrats are lucky they had a heads up and could gird for this uphill fight in advance.
2
I used to think SCOTUS was the one institution that I could trust to have the country and our people's interest at heart.
That thought went a little lower when they intervened in the Bush-Gore election. I thought they should have stayed out.
Now, after denying Garland a hearing, Trump possibly convincing Kennedy to resign, and all this talk of abortion (as if it is the only issue) it just feels just like Congress, you do me a favor a will do one for you.
The biggest difference is that they are there for life.
Against progress on race, LGBT, health, women, employment rights, and many others. They are taking us back 100 years.
I am so depressed
4
I have come to the conclusion that women of means will ALWAYS have access to safe abortions. Women who think they need abortions will get them whether they are legal or not, whether they are safe or not, consistent with their resources.
It doesn't matter which side of this you are on, the 'saving babies' part of it really isn't going to change.
Want to work on something meaningful? The leading cause of death in the US for children under 13 years old is motor vehicle collisions.
2
Ginsburg has the courage to hang in there against the tyrant, Kennedy bailed for family instead of country.
2
"bailed for family" or . . . ? Really, he couldn't have waited 4 more months so 'the people could decide'?
In this most corrupt of administrations, call me cynical but maybe an 'offer too good to refuse' was made. Unfortunately, if Trump's involved, follow the money in this blatant 'pay for play' government!
3
Senate Democrats can't stop this nomination from going through; therefore they should sit it out entirely: let Dem senators be absent from confirmation hearings, and from the Senate chamber when it goes up for a vote. Let "Justice Kavanaugh" go down in history as the justice who was seated by a single party. Deny him the legitimacy of a bipartisan process, just as was done with Garland.
And then repeat: no more participation in SC appointments until the Senate majority changes hands. The SC has become a thoroughly political body--one-party appointments would highlight how broken the constitutional system is, how ripe it is for fundamental change.
#Sit-It-Out!
5
I am so sick of commenters blaming Bernie Sanders and/or Jill Stein for Trump. Sanders campaigned for Clinton after he lost the primary. Stein got 1/3 of the votes that Gary Johnson, libertarian candidate got. How about the fact that Clinton ran a lousy campaign? That she didn't show up in the battleground states and instead spent her time with rich donors in the Hamptons? How about the fact that the Dems have not only lost the house, senate, and presidency, but the majority of the state legislatures and governorships? It's been a long time since the ossified leadership of the Democratic Party has stood for anything other than neo-liberal policies that hurt working people.
11
Hear, hear!!
The democrats will never win this using their usual tactics. It's time to step up their game and fight fire with fire!
2
Democrats will roll over like they always do. Good job not even voting in 2016. You deserve what you got.
3
Please forward this to everyone you know:
https://www.alternet.org/history-hypocrisy-evangelicals-used-be-pro-choi...
Excerpts: Randall Balmer's book, "Thy Kingdom Come" - The Christian right was not originally animated by abortion, but by the defense of private, tax-exempt, racially segregated colleges and schools.”
From Jonathan Dudley: In 1968, Christianity Today published a special issue on contraception and abortion, encapsulating the consensus among evangelical thinkers at the time. In the leading article, professor Bruce Waltke, explained the Bible plainly teaches that life begins at birth:
“God does not regard the fetus as a soul, no matter how far gestation has progressed….… Clearly, … in contrast to the mother, the fetus is not reckoned as a soul.”
From the magazine - “Christian Life” - “The Bible definitely pinpoints a difference in the value of a fetus and an adult.” … The Southern Baptist Convention passed a 1971 resolution affirming abortion should be legal not only to protect the life of the mother, but to protect her emotional health as well.
Paul Weyrich: "I was trying to get [evangelicals] interested in those issues and I utterly failed," What changed their mind was Jimmy Carter's intervention against the Christian schools, trying to deny them tax-exempt status on the basis of so-called de facto segregation."
That’s when they suddenly got religion about politics — and got political about their religion
2
I'm glad the polar extremes are energized and now have something to shout about through their bullhorns for the remainder of this sweltering summer, but what about the the rest of us? I would like someone to represent the vast majority of us who have not staked out an extreme position on abortion, gay rights, immigration. We have our opinions, to be sure, but most of us want to live in a reasonable country not governed by extremists reacting to their rabid bases. I'm more interested in infrastructure and education and climate change, but all I hear is abortion.
3
If Kavanaugh is as pro-business as we’ve been led to believe, watch out for all the issues you hold dear. All regulations that keep the corporate wolves from destroying the environment will be gone, as well as pretty much anything that keeps greed from running amok. This is really what the rightward tilts in the Court has let us in for! Abortion rights are important, as is healthcare, and these are being used as issues to clearly rouse the base on both sides - but there’s so much more to be concerned about!
3
It’s probably best to learn the actual distance that separates the two sides when figuring the length of the bridge, or if it’s even possible. Sometimes laboring under false hopes is more self-destructive than facing reality and whatever the pain of its consequences. A bruising confirmation battle does nothing more than make the hopelessness look real.
1
There is no battle to be had. All has been decided by latest court appointment which will be rubber stamped by Senate.
America's lurch to the right may direct the country rightward for the definite future.
I prefer living my expatriate retirement in a more balanced country. I welcome all those like minded Americans to join me!
3
And you have a great soccer team! Way to go, France!
Kavanaugh wrote in 2009 (when Obama was President) that Congress should consider passing a law that puts any Presidential indictments on hold until after the Presidency. No such law exists today. He wrote this because he felt the Clinton impeachment distracted him from governing. One SCOTUS Justice that wrote a review in 2009 about 'maybe' changing the law on impeachments does not mean Trump has bought his ticket to immunity. It is fear mongering from the left. The law today clearly states a Presidential impeachment is possible, only Congress can change that.
5
I fear that the Democrats are making a grievous error in assuming an obstructionist (and doomed) role in attempting to block the appointment of Judge Kavanaugh to the US Supreme Court over one issue: the constitutional right to an abortion. Unlike political junkies in this country (a tiny minority) most people in the United States are only dimly aware of the Court and its function except for what they hear/read/see via headline news. Indeed, according to one poll 10% of all college graduates in the United States believe that Judge Judy is on the Supreme Court (https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/judge-judy-supreme-court-poll/in.... I fear only negative consequences: the Republicans will paint the Democrats as unreasonable obstructionists and abortion enthusiasts and will point to Judge Kavanaugh ‘s impeccable credentials. Voters will hear that yes, Judge Kavanaugh might provide the swing vote to return the issue “back to the states”, which in the context of Democratic panic peddling will sound reasonable. This is assuredly not a winning issue for the Democrats and will hurt in November.
4
What you have to remember is that the US electorate is not very intelligent . That's why we have the president and congress that we have now. The republicans were actually rewarded for all the obstructionist shenanigans they pulled during the Obama years so what makes you think voters will be any more intelligent this time around?
4
Probably they should keep their powder dry for the next one. Because of the way both parties behave when questioning, if that is the right word, nominees (though some Ds are less polite than their counterparts) I have no patience for their "the sky is falling" cries. It's just gamesmanship, partisanship and about trying to win the next election. If they go full red alert hysterical on this, if the usual cast of characters does the usual numbers on the nominees, people will become numb to it. I recognize that partisans don't care about me or their adversaries, only their own base, but it still has the same effect. Maybe the conventional wisdom on RBG being in the end game is wrong - maybe she will be around until the next president, but you wouldn't bet on it. That's going to be the big fight. This one isn't going to mean much in the near future.
5
Even if Kavanaugh promises to recuse himself from any trump-related litigation that could arrive at the Supreme Court, there is nothing stopping him from going back on his pledge. Once he is on the Court, he is untouchable.
Besides, Kavanaugh will most likely dissemble enough in his answer to give himself an opening rule on anything to do with trump.
Basically, Kavanaugh bought this seat when he made a promise to trump in private.
4
For me, this picture says a thousand words. A white man shown opposing abortion rights. And two white male judicial choices by Trump, neither of whom represents me and yet will likely decide the fate of a major aspect of women's health, impacting millions of women far into the future.
7
The consent to Kavanaugh means a sharper division than ever in the third branch of government, as Congress and the White House already are so divisive as to threaten the union. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, 20 states will criminalize abortion and the remaining states will be safe harbors for unwanted pregnancies. If public health clinics such as Planned Parenthood in the remaining 30 states have no funding, only private physicians will be available to perform the procedure, and only those who can afford to travel and/or travel and pay will be pro-choice. Citizens in the 20 states who cannot afford to travel and pay for private abortions will bear unwanted children, while Congress reduces food stamps, health care, education, and affordable housing and the GOP excoriates those in poverty for not getting a job. We are engaged in a virtual civil war without guns, and the divisions are clear enough. The entire system is threatened with collapse because there is the vision of the public interest, the best interests of everyone, and of building a better future has been lost.
3
The photo caption says it all, "A man protesting abortion rights yelling at a group of demonstrators outside the Supreme Court..." Like he would ever need one? As activist Florynce Kennedy said in 1971, and Gloria Steinem made the quote even more famous, "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament." So sad to see decades of progress for women's reproductive rights under attack. My only hope is that today's young women get out and vote for the freedoms many of their mothers fought so hard for.
7
Just think if the GOP had done the right thing and confirmed Garland, this would not be so contention. Their scorched earth strategy will not lead to compromise now. You're welcome GOP, courtesy of Mitch McConnell.
5
That must be why the Democratic Party nominated the spectacularly moneyed, Wall Street funded, Hillary Clinton over poor Bernie Sanders. Even the liberal and progressive masses favored the moneyed plutocrat.
This would be just as contentious. Anybody Trump nominates is contentious. That's the nature of politics.
1
It must be hard, since the Democrats seem to have no platform except resist Trump. Health care? No. Economy? No. Student debt? No. Oh, immigration. Go for that one.
1
I'm glad the Democrats are fighting Trump's nominee. I don't care what his credentials are or how qualified he is. I'm tired of the SCOTUS being a conservative joke. They don't represent the views of the people and neither does congress, or the president for that matter. Government of the people, by the people, for the people has indeed perished from the earth sometime ago. We are now governed by a minority of moneyed plutocrats who's only care for the people is to toss a bone every once in a great while to stop outright rebellion from fomenting. The fact that our so-called president is a billionaire confirms it. The fact that you can't run for public office without big money confirms it. The fact that conservatives will spend $10 MILLION dollars to 'promote' a SCOTUS candidate confirms it. That's more money than an average American can conceive of in their everyday life, but it's small change in the world of American plutocracy.
Fight, Democrats, to the last. Enough is enough. There should be no question, no wavering, only solid defiance. Americans are TIRED of the guys with money calling all the shots.
6
You liberals are something else, what fear mongering with no facts. First, you need to have hard evidence against Trump for an actual impeachment, then get the Senate votes for an actual impeachment, someone challenging the impeachment in court, then some lower court actually ruling impeachment of a sitting President is illegal (when it is not, so a court will never rule this), and being appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court, which is highly unlikely since impeachment laws are clear. Even after all these unlikely events, you'd have to have the majority of the SCOTUS Justices, for whatever random reason, ruling that current impeachment laws are unconstitutional. Even if it got to this level, Kavanaugh may not even rule in favor of Trump, and if he did he would likely be the only SCOTUS justice to do so.
3
Wait for the Meuller report.
4
I'm waiting. We're all waiting.
2
How can there be such a big fight for something which is so hopeless ... the fight is all about energizing for November ... healthcare, women's rights, voting rights. This 'fight' is over.
If a president nominates someone who is eminently qualified -- and nobody can argue Brett Kavanaugh is not - that nominee should be confirmed by a bi-partisan vote in the senate
9
tell that to Mitch please
2
Agreed, Bernie would've won. I also thank him for running, and regret that the machinations of the DNC denied him a fair shot.
3
Checks and Balances 2.0 and "judicial incrementalism" (SCOTUS composition): https://www.fundamentalreform.org/
How we appoint Justices to the Supreme Court and maintain them on it needs fundamental reform.
Life tenure for SCOTUS Justices injects unnecessary uncertainty, risk, and, ultimately, polarization into our political process; and each of these negative aspects will intensify as life expectancy increases in the coming years.
The ideal for our representative democracy is that no majority (conservative, liberal, or other) can disproportionately impact the political direction of its country. Life tenure for US Supreme Court Justices practically guarantees this will happen.
Please go to Checks and Balances 2.0 at https://www.fundamentalreform.org/ and read about the checks and balance that “judicial incrementalism” would provide. While the concept is not perfect, I believe it is on the right track and could provide a better way forward to manage the appointment and maintenance of the SCOTUS
I don't recall the right going apoplectic when Kagen and Sotomayor were nominated. Both were and are unabashed left-wing revisionists that look to bend the Constitution to fit the liberal agenda. Maybe conservatives are better behaved? Maybe they recognized that the path to success wasn't through primal screams in Mexican restaurants, but through building compelling reasons to vote for conservative lawmakers.
The most interesting thing to come out of the Era of Trump so far has been the unmasking of the left. Gone is the façade of moral superiority, gone is the façade of fighting for the working class. Moral superiority is ceded when free speech is deemed hate speech at college campuses, when religious freedom is deemed bigotry, and pretty much whenever Maxine Waters opens her mouth. The working class, by and large, transformed itself into the unblinking, rock-solid Trump base.
The left has no message other than obstruct and HATE TRUMP and anyone that has the audacity to agree with something that Trump does or says. All this vitriol will cement the conservative base in the midterms and should scare the beejesus out of the red-state Democrats.
So, fight the battle that will not be won, just because it feels good and ensure Republican victories in 2018 and 2020.
11
All the advertisement make sense in creating a sense of urgency among the democrats, but we need to spend as much money as possible to create a genuine threat of relection loss among blue and purple state republican senators. Even if Democrats lose seats in November, we need to make life difficult for the likes of Susan Collins, Corey Gardner, Dean Heller and Rob Portman and perhaps Marco Rubio as well. When Mitch McConnell prevented a vote on President Obama's pick, not a single republican senator objected: this shows how ineffective and pathetic Democratic opposition has been to Supreme Court packing plans of republicans. Let us Democrats do better this time. We may not succeed stopping Kavanaugh from becoming Supreme Court justice, but we should be able to generate some hard feelings and sleepless nights among vulnerable republican senators.
1
What is truly disheartening is that the vast majority of Americans do not want the decisions of the far right to rule the land. The popular vote in many of the last Presidential elections tells us that. What a shame that something like the electoral college has caused all this havoc. Let's all face the fact that we have not created a democracy, and that the rule of the few has prevailed.
5
9 months before the 2016 general election McConnell said let the people decide the next Supreme Court member. Now it is 4 months to the mid term election and McConnell can't fill the position quick enough. Hypocrisy is more than just a tool of the republican party, it is a platform.
8
It will be a battle unlike any we have seen in history,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut,
This should be some battle if it is going to be nastier and more personally demeaning than the Bork and Thomas hearings. But if anyone can do it, a democrat with his opinion or his base angry can be expected to do it in the nastiest and ugliest way possible.
All's fair in love and war and this is nuclear war so slander, defamation or any other otherwise intolerable device that can be used, will be used and justified by the democrats.
1
Political hysteria aside, Kavanaugh appears to be a good man and a highly qualified jurist. Democrats who oppose him because he will not legislate from the bench, or worse, simply because he was appointed by a Republican President, are as bad as their worst political enemies.
8
Although church and state are supposed to be separated, it's obvious that many of our politicians and judges believe in rule by bible. I'm just glad the bible doesn't say global warming is a hoax or clean air is the work of the devil.
2
The Senate should confirm this choice next week. We already know more about him than any nominee in history. Waiting just gives Democrats time to embarrass themselves with endless whining. Have a one day hearing on Friday and vote Monday.
2
What's the big hurry? Didn't Mitch McConville tell us that SC seats are not to be filled in an election year?
5
Kavanaugh will be confirmed and seated.
Are you registered to vote?
Will you vote for Democrats on November 6?
Our nation hangs in the balance.
2
"The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, excoriated Democrats for declaring their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh even before his nomination was announced." They have no shame.
4
“It will be a battle unlike any we have seen in history”
Seriously?
There's no hope of blocking this appointment, short of some scandal emerging. The time to stop it was in November, 2016, when millions of natural Democrats just couldn't be bothered to vote, despite the fact a monster was running on the Republican ticket. I'm very sorry to say you apathetic non-voters deserve Trump, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh--the whole fetid lot of them.
2
Not really concerned about this. More concerned about the guy in the White House and his merry band of “yes men” and the green lighting of the racist behavior we have seen practiced over the past few months by some of our more upstanding citizens.
Let’s not forget that the SCOTUS sided with Muhammad Ali and won his appeal of his conviction in 1967 for refusing to report for induction into the United States military forces during the Vietnam War. And that decision was to the chagrin of those in political power and many Americans.
Nothing good ever happens without a fight.
1
If this was really important to Democrats, then they should have voted in 2014. That year, however, had a huge drop-off in Democratic voting.
If you didn't vote, you have zero, repeat, ZERO right to complain...you farmed your influence out to your fellow citizens.
Full disclosure: I almost always vote Democratic, and I always vote. So I voted, and I may now complain.
I've decided to complain about whiners who don't vote.
4
If Democrats have a problem with Brett Kavanaugh there's something they can do about it
Win an election
5
The nerve of McConnell. His blocking Garland is and always will be a stain on the senate. His disrespect of Obama and his "No policy" for 8 years was outrageous. McConnell allowing trump to lie and blindside honesty, integrity and respect. This conservatism is nothing more than chains on society from McConnell and his gang of thugs to deny.
10
Clinton's first nomination was made on June 15, 1993, well before any investigation. His second was made in May 13, 1993 about a week after Paula Jones filed suit. Both nominations were well before Clinton was impeached.
Fight hard but only under the big tent which is the Democratic party.
1
Many in media and those on the left will run around with their hair on fire claiming all manner of parade of horribles if this nominee is confirmed. Then, like Gorsuch before him, he will be confirmed. If you genuinely care about the nominee, read the actual opinions he wrote as a justice on the DC Circuit Court for Appeals and little else. The world is not ending because of this nominee . . . .
4
Every article on the front page of this newspaper, presupposes that Kavanaugh will be confirmed, how he "will fit" on the Court. Please stop. There is a fight to be sure that looms large, as there should be since the little man in our White House who loves Putin and hates our allies has made certain that his selection will protect him in the event of further investigation or indictment. It is a sad state of affairs when Trump is normalized in this way. He is a self-admitted sexual predator. He has allied himself with dictators. He has kidnapped little children and transported them across state lines. He doesn't know where they are and neither do his agencies. So, stop talking about his "nominee" as if there are no obstacles to his confirmation and instead, start praying that we can stop them all.
3
The "XX" marks the spot. Disgraceful. Prepared statements before a pick was even announced. The democratic party is a dumpster fire and they don't care if it burns down the whole nation. This type of behavior isn't going to win the DNC any elections, but their leadership is so weak that they literally have no unified voice, they only have a million death screams.
I have to say that the militant rhetoric from the left is very unsavory and, if kept up, dangerous. Hilary lost the election. Go protest her and leave the rest of Americans alone. We're sick of it and it's driving us to him, not away from him.
4
It would seem to be easier to avoid investigation if one was not a crook, one did not collude with Russia, and a scammer.
3
I'm just relieved he didn't nominate a Daffy Duck equivalent. Relax liberals, concentrate on November so we can avoid another 2016 November.
would put a qualifier on that statement. If Daffy Duck equivalent was pro choice and otherwise liberal I have no doubt that all democrats would be supporting the nomination regardless of Daffy's knowledge of the constitution.
"I really don't care about embryos, do u?"
1
So the Democrats win this fight ... then what? Stop the next one, and then the next one, and then the one after that ... until even their own get sick of the sideshow and they are forced to advance the one who has gotten progressively worse at every iteration? You don't win wars by stalemating every battle, you win wars by moving the battleground to a place you can win, state legislatures. Where the heck is the "leadership" in the Democratic party?
4
Yes, let's roll back the clock to a time when priests dictated what women did literally with their uteruses, including whether they could have a hysterectomy. Or when a dying woman could be denied an abortion (as in Ireland) even when she was miscarrying. Oh yes, definitely a reason to celebrate.
4
Why should there be a battle? Democrat/Republican Presidents always nominate judges of like views, that is called consequences of an election. Democrats need to convince voters that only they can govern the right way and vote only for Democrats.......otherwise they will lose, nobody wins all the time.........unless you are a dictator.
4
Democrats have apparently not learned one of the oldest lessons of human combat. You never play your opponent’s game. Instead, you do what you do best. The Republicans are the masters of muck for whom ethics, democratic values, the rule of law and fundamental fairness often mean little. Democrats look like morons when they parrot the Republicans’ bad behavior. (See recent public shaming incidents). Democrats must reconsider the petty and likely futile retaliatory campaign they have already begun to undertake to block the confirmation of President Trump’s nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court, the highly qualified Brett M. Kavanaugh, a well-respected conservative federal appeals court judge. Instead, they must focus all of their energy and resources on winning the midterm elections later this year and the 2020 presidential election.
1
Howard,
I have mixed feelings about your idea.
Yes, Democrats need to focus on the coming elections in 2018 and 2020. But, but they need to get fired up, first.
Simply getting out the vote, may not fire Democrats up.
They need a cause. They need drama to wake up voters.
Obama was no drama and Hillary was...boring.
The Court battle may be what they need to wake up.
======================================
4
If Democrats “need” to wage a futile campaign to block a well-qualified conservative Republican Supreme Court nominee to “motivate” Democratic voters to vote in this year’s midterm elections, when they do not have the votes to do so, after the tectonic plate-shifting election of Donald Trump in 2016, the crystallization of Republican Party control of the entire U.S. government and most of the state governments, President Trump’s daily exhibition of historic incompetence and unpreparedness, his fascination with fascism, the GOP-led corporate capture of our branches of government, America’s gross wealth and income disparity, etcetera, then the Democrat Party should shut down and close its offices.
Hey, Dems - gloves off. Fight with everything you've got.
4
Mueller, where are you?
7
What a shocker, another white male.
5
So that's how you judge a jurist...by race and gender?
2
This may, finally, be the wake up call, Democrats need.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Since Trump was elected, Democrats have been complaining, but they have been sitting on their hands, when it comes to action.
Time to act, for the Democratic Party, to push for the House, and to push back on Trump, to the max. Yes, we can. Yes, we must!
This is not a fire drill. This is the real thing, for America. Hello?
==============================================
3
Trump is a mentally ill crackpot who flaunts the law. He should be immediately impeached. He is a disgrace to the Constitution.
6
Good! If our Democratic Senators from Red states are going to play the "game" to hold on to their precious seats, then it is high time we citizens fight a fight never seen before to preserve our rights. And that is what it boils down to, folks. We women have a right to our own bodies and minds. No one and no one entity should dare take away from us what is innately and undeniably ours..no church, no government, and no ideological Supreme Court. I am appalled that the Christian Right has betrayed the very tenets on which our country was founded because of an extreme agenda that is neither rational nor Christ-like. They do not deserve to have this man of peace in its name. Separation of church and state..dying.
And the ACA? What harm has it done. None! It was working. Millions of Americans who never had a chance to a healthy life were given it..finally. All it took was tweaking...that's all. Yet the ruthless, the greedy, the cruel must demolish us. At this rate, we are going to have a bunch of infants born who with their parents will be denied the means toward good health.
And don't get me started on LGBT and immigrant rights. Remember that fine movie NETWORK? Well, just like Peter Finch, we need to say in unison, "I'm mad as hell, and I am not going to take this anymore!"
8
It is difficult for me to begin to listen to fundamentalists as their rhetoric is too similar to their enemies in parts of the world they ruthlessly bomb.
My bewilderment is only heightened by the call for more guns and cameras in public spaces. Emergency kiosks for rape victims and highway stops to inspect your papers and maybe your car.
As hypocritical it is to ban abortion yet bomb and support gun rights, so is the notion there is a written intention that being free and brave means being afraid, nosey and judgemental.
In Maya Jasanoff's book titled Liberty's Exiles, patriots beat the every living life out of their neighbors in what became the Revolutionary War. Those Loyal to England got the hell out of dodge, and guess what, a whole lot of them found a better life, many in Sierra Leone. History's relevance rings true as a bell today as this battle for what women need might as well be Puerto Rico or Yemen with bombs, starvation and families separated from their children by courts.
What is conservative now has nothing to do with conservation of anything except our history of brutality we continue to repeat.
3
What a bizarre pile of comments here.
The "covfefe" GOP blame Pelosi, Stein, and Sanders for their own putin-backed theft of the government, so naturally Democrats (and "Democrats") rush to grab the pitchfork from the GOP's hand, point it at the three, and say "You heard that? The totally believable and non-corrupt GOP say YOU'RE the problem. So you are. Get out, scum!"
While said "Democrats" figure out which ideas or #ideas could somehow be better on Twitter than "just show the dotard's racist rambling without comment, followed by 'I'm Jane Democrat and I approve this message' ", the GOP show us they don't even need Twitter or Diebold to steal elections—just sufficiently mal-informed commenters.
I'm only surprised no one's taken the Bernieblame further and mentioned the Bernie Bros myth here.
As Michelle Obama once apparently said, "When they go low, we fasten our seatbelts and fire up the rocket-drill to race them down to Earth's mantle!"
1
I applaud Senator Bob Casey’s pledge not to vote for any nominee on Mr. Trump’s list. Some Democrats have been saying that the battle is unwinnable, and thus that it shouldn’t be held as a test for the party. Instead the party should look ahead to the real battle, the upcoming elections.
But here’s the thing. Progressive voters ARE looking at how hard the Democratic leaders fight the Kavanaugh nomination. They are looking for some gesture from the party that it is not going to, once again, tuck its tail between legs and surrender to the Republicans as they have done for decades. This is a spine test. Even if they haven’t a snowball’s chance in hell of winning they need to prove that they have some grit beyond obsequiousness to their donors.
This is war. Remember: the Republicans (with the help of Joe Biden) abducted the traditional Supreme Court nomination process when they refused to consider Merrick Garland. The Democrats need to lay down on the tracks for this one. Casey and other Democrats who are refusing to participate in a corrupt process will win the respect of progressives who are quickly losing faith in the party and beginning to look elsewhere. Such a gesture would be an indication of whether the Dems are willing to fight – or whether they will be spineless as usual.
I’ve said this before: Michelle Obama’s high road is closed to traffic. The Republicans blew it up. The Democrats need to learn how to fight. What do they have to lose?
4
When I lived abroad for eleven years back during the Reagan, Bush, and Clinton era's I would view America with such disdain and confusion. Jerry Falwell and his shenanigans, the protests about art and the "Piss Christ" issues and Robert Maplethorpes exhibit in Ohio. The abortion-Pro-Life/Pro-Choice debates. AIDS.
A fellow African-American who is still in Berlin said to me: Why don't these Pro-Life people go into these underserved, poor, black and brown neighborhoods and parent, mentor and guide these people out of poverty and take the babies, toddlers, and teens that are struggling to LIVE and help them, rather than spending all their money on bullhorns and blocking these poor ass families from health care and housing? He said: "I'm a Buddhist-and isn't the dignity of all life, in the here and now more important than anything else?"
He believed that it's the dignity of life, not the sanctity of it that needs to be respected treasured. The mysteries of the universe are too vast to spend so much time figuring out while people are starving and being denied what so many have and take for granted.
I bring this up because if everyone is girding for this fight-that we will be reading about for the next 6 months it shouldn't distract from the fact that the right to live with dignity is Pro-Life as is the Right to Choose what is best with your own life.
Jesus would never tell you what to do. He would walk with you until you could walk on & live as best as possible with love.
4
I'm not so sure Kavanaugh is the huge beast that the liberals are so up in arms about. And, I'm a progressive.
Sure, Trump could have done better by nominating a female but I'm also grateful he didn't choose the one of the five being speculated on since she had virtually zero public courtroom experience with real day problems of modern America.
At least Trump had the decency to consider Justice Kennedy's suggestions for his replacement since he could have instead ruffled through his insider rolodex and chosen someone that one of his right hand men suggested. I'd much rather deal with similar replacement of Kennedy, Catholic or otherwise, versus the alternative of Clarence Thomas cut-out. Also, it is being reported by The Columbus Dispatch today that Kavanaugh is/was a huge campaign contributor to the current Ohio gubernatorial campaign of the former Consumer Financial Protection leader Richard Cordray, a long time Democrat.
We shall see.
17
I don't think they can they a glove on this guy and I'm a large D-Dem. The only possibility is in a delay and thats only if we flip them. We need an amendment that appoints Supremes for 20 years and out. The framers thought lifetime meant 35 years.
1
Battle??? The war was lost when Bill Clinton insisted to the DNC that it was Hillary's turn, then could not help himself from meeting with Loretta Lynch in broad daylight setting the whole Comey take over with all its ramifications into motion. If we are so eager to criticize the Republicans we have to at least be honest with ourselves. Obama knew it was doomed, the public did not (except the younger generations) or did not care. Lets come to grips with the mess we made because Ruth Ginsburg will retire next on Trumps watch unless she holds out till she is 89 years old! So....there is going to be an even bigger slide of the supreme court with the next appointee by Trump. Next time lets take more seriously what will be remembered as the most significant presidential election in half a century.
13
Democrats are just using this as a fundraising issue. They have no reasonable expectation to block Kavanaugh and their objections are based on partisan ideology. Kavanaugh needn't espouse liberal beliefs to be entirely qualified and worthy of the seat, and the President is empowered to select him. Schumer is using this as an opportunity to co-opt progressive outrage and money into the mainstream of Democrat party machinery. Angry progressives - for the DNC it's either fight them or co-opt them, and here we are. If liberals are going to run with pictures of illegal immigrant kids, then conservatives should run with pictures of Kavanaugh's daughters as the left attempts to besmirch their dad for being a great American. Meanwhile, every craven Democrat is shooting out fundraising form letters with Kavanaugh's name pasted in.
14
We kidnap children and put them in cages. We are a truly evil society because we tolerate it.
5
Instead of spending millions of dollars on TV ads opposing a person who is not up for election, as if ads are going to change the mind of a single senator, the D's should be spending that money on fall campaigns.
13
A few days ago, Poland ousted 27 of 72 justices from its Supreme Court equivalent, including the Chief Justice.
We are fewer steps away from a similar purge than many people would like to believe.
DT might well revel in Kavanaugh's looming confirmation, sure. What's to stop him, really, from pushing his lust for power to then getting rid of RBG, Sotomayor, Kagan and Breyer? Ensuring an even more fanatical ultraconservative court would further solidify his "legacy".
DT has also been grinding one heck of a vengeful ax against Chief Justice Roberts re his vote on the ACA, so he's in the ousting crosshairs as well.
I can already hear both the naysayers and the trolls now, claiming this idea as ridiculous, fantastical, excessively worrisome, that there are "checks and balances in place." Oh really? Like how the Legislative and Judicial branches have been doing such a great job on curbing the Executive branch for the past year and a half?
Yet how often since DT assumed power have you found yourself thinking, "This is a new low ... this is unprecedented ... presidents just don't do that, say that, think that ... ?"
Incremental obscenities become the norm - while we're all looking.
7
Our government is a fascist dictatorship. A few edges need be dealt with to make it pure but we are 90% there.
3
Sadly, of course, the opposition will be 99% smoke and a tiny and useless fire. Dems likely will all oppose, but given the need of some to hold their seats likely pandering will occur. Republicans would vote to confirm a guy fresh out of law school if they thought they could depend on him to squash to advancements in the law for females, gays, persons of color, and the middle class and more economically challenged. This is what America get saddled with when it actually voted in Lyin' Donald, and the vast majority of those doing that voting still don't seem to realize that nothing good for them will come of him.
10
Oh please. Clinton wasn't under investigation for treasonous acts.
10
Merrick Brian Garland is the Chief United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s boss. Interesting. What questions this raises. Is Kavanaugh somehow more qualified for a seat on the Supreme Court?
16
"A Confirmation Fight ‘Unlike Any We Have Seen in History’
Are you serious NYT ?
bork
v.
1987, "to discredit a candidate for some position by savaging his or her career and beliefs," from name of U.S. jurist Robert H. Bork (1927-2012), whose Supreme Court nomination in 1987 was rejected after an intense counter-campaign."
Until the impending fight coins a new word, curb your enthusiasm
9
I'm an exhausted liberal, and I cannot be the only one. Ginsburg is 85 and has had cancer; she had no business rolling our dice for her own pride. Sen. Schumer was the one who told Hillary to blow off western Pennsylvania; why does he have any credibility now? As a 50-something gay man, I'm plenty anxious, but the time for "mobilization" was the midterms in '10 and '14, and in the lackluster general in '16. Please stop spinning wheels now. We should invest our energy in meaningful, practical work. Opposition to this nomination is fruitless, and it only serves to get liberals' hopes up.
21
I agree. I’d rather the Dems spent the time and energy putting together an inclusive platform and selling it to the American people.
3
This is a bit of an exaggeration with the strengths of both sides being what they are !Kavanaugh will only be a lightning rod for the current overheated political rhetoric !
A little irony for everyone:
The 2016 official GOP platform whines about "five unelected
lawyers robbed 320 million Americans of their legitimate constitutional authority" to deny equal rights to people, but are fine with five unelected lawyers robbing 161 million Americans of the right to choose whether they're have to bear a rapist's baby.
7
That’s the funny thing about American elections and the two party system. When the party in power changes, the PR folks just trade briefing books. Senator Schumer wanted to slow the process down when Bush made a nomination. He wanted to speed things up when Obama made a nomination. And now that Trump is president, he wants to slow things down again. What’s really amazing is Schumer has no shame changing his opinion to suit the way the wind is blowing.
1
Trump will run hog-wild when Kavanaugh is seated. He literally got a "Get out of jail free" card.
9
How can a person call themselves pro-life while supporting executions, bombings, running down protestors with cars, rampant unchecked gun proliferation, and infant formula company profits over breastfeeding?
"Pro-life" is one of the greatest scams conservative hucksters have tricked Republican voters with.
18
Harry Reid changed the rules and Obama gave his pick to Hillary. Blame your own party.
15
“Obama gave his pick to Hillary!!
LOL!
You've clearly forgotten that McConnell in an unconstitutional, blatant action BLOCKED any consideration of Obama's nominee to the Court! And, that was of a *moderate* judge!
Furthermore, as to Reid changing the rules for lower court federal judges that's because the Republicans were slow walking, delaying, and obstructing Obama's picks for the lower federal courts. Plus, even if Reid was wrong, McConnell's actins were worse, especially as they involved the Supreme Court!
In any case, two wrongs don't make a right! Or, didn't you go to elementary school?!
Gorsuch, a right wing justice, is occupying the seat that rightfully belongs to Merrick Garland!
1
Harry Reid stole Obama's SCOTUS nomination? Harry Reid supports a treasonous and corrupt president for 'political expediency'?
Republicans will find a way to blame everyone but themselves for their own actions.
2
Why did Harry Reid do that? Oh right! Because Mitch "no bar too low to stoop under" McConnell held up Obama's judiciary choices for 6 years! The republicans have shown repeatedly their willingness to jam the gears of government to get their way, like a tantruming child.
As for Hillary, she won the popular vote, had russian hackers undermining her campaign, and really worst of all was the target of a 25 year right wing smear campaign to blow out of proportion every move she made to fire up the opposition. She is eminently more qualified for president than the current office holder.
3
There is no "your" Honor among thieves.
They stole the Obama Supreme Court seat just so they could bully the poor and powerless, take housing, health care, and food from the children and the very poor.
It is all show from now on. At the hearings the "judge" will lie through his teeth, and then, on the Court, perform just as that other liar, Clarence Thomas, did, and kiss every appendage that the far right might present.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
10
If it's true that threats to the ACA are the most potent issue the Democrats have in the midterms, the Democrats are in deep trouble.
5
More unhinged Democrats attempting the impossible.
9
What a country.
Trump and his thugs are under criminal investigation for treason,and for colluding with the enemy to steal our democracy. WHY IS HE APPOINTING A JUDGE? He will end up going to prison if there is justice and wo there should be no way he is even involved in picking a judge. VOTE VOTE VOTE Call your senators
6
"Forced Motherhood is Female Enslavement."
1) Is Motherhood enslavement?
2) Every woman from the beginning of time until abortion was a slave?
3) I get rape, incest, etc., but I'm not sure it was forced. How about cause and effect?
8
Clinton made his appointments early in his term, before he was under investigation.
2
Perhaps now the Democratic party will make SCOTUS one of its campaign points ongoing? They barely mentioned it during the 2016 campaign, while the Republicans made it a central point of focus in grassroots campaigning.
6
"Democrats likely to lose" Ha, ha ha ha, you think? They
intend to lose, while appearing as if they are fighting for
their lives and begging and pleading with their voters,
whom they promptly ignore once they are reelected,
to SAVE the supreme court, or Dacca, or Obama care, or
better gun control or cleaner air and water, the list is endless,
to chip in, chip in small amounts, which the Democratic party will then pocket for their own nefarious uses. Except for the progressives and the socialist Democrats ( so badly smeared by both corrupt parties) These brave souls are actually trying
to save the USA. Go on rotten to the core corporate Democrats, keep on bashing the ones who want all of us to thrive and are against the evil of big corporations and big
one percenters who buy up politicians like race horses, well
race horse get treated better probably, maybe more like racing greyhounds who they can kick around. So watch the show of the corporate Democrats pretending to fight. And oh Kamala, does not do well for your presidential aspirations to
support that Heidi something. You may have given up corporate money because you read the polls, but that woman openly supports the Republicans and YES Kamala, we should get rid of ICE
3
Senators Judiciary should ask Judge Kavanaugh the following questions:
• “When you look at the Constitution, do you see words on parchment or penumbras?
• “Do you think Article V of the Constitution is no longer needed?”
In nature, a “penumbra” is the partially shaded outer region of the shadow cast by an opaque object. The shadows cast by sun or moon during eclipses have penumbras. But In U.S. constitutional law, the term “penumbra” has come to refer to a group of rights derived, by implication, from other rights explicitly protected in the Bill of Rights. In Griswold v. Connecticut (1965,) Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas famously argued that “specific guarantees in the Bill of Rights have penumbras, formed by emanations from those guarantees that help give them life and substance.” (I’m not making this up.) For example, a woman’s right to an abortion is a penumbra derived, by implication, from the “right to privacy,” which is itself a penumbra derived from the 14th Amendment’s “Due Process Claus.”
Why do we need Article V, which describes the amendment process, if the Supreme Court can derive implicit rights from penumbras? A nominee who thinks we still need Article V obvious has no faculty for perceiving penumbras.
2
Progressives, with their access to the film industry, which makes its living by manipulation of our feelings and emotions as we sit in dark movie theaters, should take a cue from the horror movie genre.
Scare people.
Not with false content.
With reality. The reality of American life if today's mutation of the Republican party prevails.
What I call, "The Radical Republican Reality."
Make the coming court nomination solely about abortion. Produce this commercial for TV or the web.
Find a mother whose daughter was raped by an unknown assailant and impregnated.
She's out there. This does happen to people.
Through her anguished tears have her recount the brutal attack on her young daughter.
"Thank God," she says, that her family "was able to have access to a safe, legal abortion" so that, "my sweet daughter would not have to bear this man's child. This brute who beat her and raped her!"
And she continues, "I can't imagine living in a cruel America that would force my daughter to choose between bearing his child or be prosecuted as a criminal. I can't imagine our beloved country, with our cherished freedoms, falling into the hands of the current Radical Republicans who openly call for criminalizing abortion in all cases. This is what's at stake… today it was my daughter… tomorrow…you."
This isn't exaggeration.
Show clips of rabid conservatives.
Their twisted, heartless ideas.
Let their own words hang them.
Scare Americans.
Scare with the horror of truth.
5
You've described the right wing talk radio / cable horror show to a T. Projection is great though, isn't it?
1
Marie - It's worked pretty well for the right. What has the left got to lose, it's dignity?
Personally I’m for the right to abortion (not unlimited), but I can’t stop thinking that the terrible scenario mentioned here could also end with the child’s birth and adoption. Very early abortion could be simple, but a late one could be a terrible scenario in itself.
But that’s if don’t think in simplistic slogans.
1
Trump is doing everything he can to fire up his base. And he is succeeding wildly. Even moderate republicans support the caging of children at the border, they object only to dissemination of photos and to Trump's tweets. They celebrate his pardoning of crooks, his moves to destroy Obama's legacies, and his efforts to solidify the ethnic supremacist identity movement in the nation. All in all, much as he might horrify people on the left, and much as his actions are deconstructed to suggest he is unqualified - Trump is winning. Bigly.
What have all the protests gotten us? Protests cannot stop the majority Republicans from voting the way they do. What democrats are not doing is coalescing around a leader, registering voters, or implementing plans so that people whom the republicans will prevent from voting, can actually vote. I have yet to see an election cycle after which sad sack constituents did not lament that their voter registrations were lost, the republicans perpetrated fraud, etc.
But there is more. Democrats have yet to identify issues that will make Americans jump off our couches, stop staring into our cell phones, and come out to vote because our lives and our children's lives depend on it. The best they've got is "free this and that" and "omigod global warming" in the horrendously weak and whining context of "isn't this just terrible." This works for some, but horrifies others in the center and left (never mind the right). Go home, register voters.
7
As long as corporations are people, this is irrelevant. Those with money will continue to buy politicians and judges of both parties.
And our vaunted military -- which duped much of the world on 9/11 -- will continue to rule.
3
It seems that if there is a single issue in all of this, it's not abortion or health care or conservatism or liberalism. A mostly cross-party unifying issue would be the apparent failsafe granting of ultimate immunity above constitutional limitations to a megalomaniac.
9
How wonderful it will be for the great middle of the American electorate to see how the Democrats hate a thoughtful, smart, fair judge who is widely admired by lawyers, judges and law professors.
It speaks volumes about how far out of touch Democrat politicians have become.
17
I agree with this comment. I despise Trump and I don't mind Hillary. But really the Dem politicians are out of touch (as is the New York Times.)
7
The only battle that should begin is one to change the way we appoint Supreme Court Justices. Judges should be appointed on a regular, rotating basis and only be allowed to serve for say ten years. This way, no president gets the opportunity to stack the court and the public doesn't have to deal with "life time" appointments and with opinions oblivious to reality.
9
The president should not be allowed to appoint a supreme court justice while he is under investigation.
24
In the end, Democrats will cave, as they always do. American liberals insist on the fiction politics is a rational game, in which involved citizens play by the rules; or that there is a "moderate faction" on the other side that can be reasoned with, cajoled to find an intermediate, compromise solution. Conservatives understood a while back this is a primal struggle where only winning matters, and have no qualms about thoroughly breaking the system (see McConnell's stealing of an SC seat--because they could.) Nothing will change until liberals too (i.e. Democrats) show they have no problem ignoring the rules, going for the jugular, breaking the system.
4
Nobody objected when Bill Clinton nominated two Supreme Court justices when he was under investigation.
10
[corrected version]
Clinton's first nomination was made on June 15, 1993, well before any investigation. His second was made in May 13, 1994, about a week after Paula Jones filed suit. Both nominations were well before Clinton was impeached.
5
Clinton's first nomination was made on June 15, 1993, well before any investigation. His second was made in May 13, 1993 about a week after Paula Jones filed suit. Both nominations were well before Clinton was impeached.
4
Sorry Roy, but based on your name I'm assuming that you'll never have to worry about the state forcing you to give birth.
Also, healthcare, workers' rights, environmental protection and the favoring of corporations and the donor class over ordinary Americans are issues that are of concern with Kavanaugh.
1
Battle? Democrats only know how to battle against one another. The time for a "battle" was when Mitch McConnell blocked the Merrick Garland nomination. Instead, the Democrats pandered and capitulated. Game over.
9
Perhaps there is another angle to this nomination. Justice Kennedy's son, Justin, was head of the real estate capital markets division at Deutsche Bank and approved a total of $1billion in real estate loans to The Trump Organization when no NYC bank would touch Donald Trump (and still won't) because of his bankruptcies and long -very long history- of his inability or unwillingness to pay back loans.
Perhaps the quid--pro-quo was "I'll retire (and no problem with the loans my son generated for your businesses) if you nominate my former clerk, Kavanaugh." Then everybody is happy!
And perhaps yet another reason why Trump would not disclose his taxes.
6
"... the days of bipartisan confirmations of the sort experienced by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg are long gone"
Say what?
The good 'ol bipartisan days during Judge Bork confirmation? Or the good 'ol days when Judge Clarence Thomas was confirmed?
There was nobody more qualified than Judge Bork to be in the U.S. Supreme Court, barred none! It was a true disgrace what the democrats and the liberals did to this man and his family.
Nonetheless, it was a shameful political act that prevented Judge Garland from being considered to the the Supreme Court. I am certain he would have been a fine Associate Supreme Court Justice.
8
Can’t stand the heat?
Get out of the kitchen.
It is truly shameful what Bork did to the country, carrying out Nixon's orders to fire the special prosecutor and try to help him obstruct justice!
He paid the price deservedly so.
Now, let's add Kavanaugh here, too, who was a key partisan player working for Kenneth Starr's kangaroo investigation and even wrote much of the infamous Starr report! Somehow, it's OK to trash a Democratic president, but not Trump!
Hypocrisy!
2
Seriously? It takes some doing to believe President Trump has not been trashed.
Turn to any media outlet and you'll see the trashing.
However, I agree with you, unaccountable special counsel/prosecutor offices are a threat to established constitutional procedures. Surprisingly Judge Kenneth Starr also agrees with you. He testified against agencies long time ago, even before he was charge with the Clinton investigation.
So, if I understand your logic correctly, by inference you also agree the Mueller investigation to the Trump-Russia collusion is also illegitimate. After all, no crime has been found after almost two years of solid investigation.
What, exactly, can Democrats do to stop this? Nothing. All fire and fury, and hysterical headlines, but unfortunately this is done deal.
12
I hope those people in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania who either did not vote or voted for Jill Stein are happy with themselves now.
9
Trump thinks President is above the law, Judge Kavanaugh seems to agree
10
This nomination is not about Kavanaugh. It's about the Republicans having the right to stop all judicial nominees to SCOTUS they wish to and Democrats not having the right to do that. In other words it's about democracy vs. kleptocracy, or perhaps McConnellocracy.
9
We are entering in an Autocracy with half the US forming akin to the nazi party under hitler (blaming a single group of people or group of minorities for the country's faults, family separation and concentration camps, alienation from other counties. collusion with russia. to name a few)
Republicans are willing to grant the US a functional king
For all this non representation representation we could have stayed with England
1
Who do you guys think would be a Democrat the people could rally under, or a leader as it were? Is there any candidate that could rally enough support to stand up against the crusade?
Besides trumps anti-thesis oprah who is also rich and would gather minority votes like ants to sugar but won't run
There can't be a battle unless both sides have weapons. Other than the compliant media, the Democratic Party has nothing but words.
9
Fight? Battle? If the Democrats spend money on this process, it’s money poured down the rat hole. And, it will be yet another in a long string of poor decisions by the Party.
Little has changed for the better since 2016. The same ineffective leadership remains in place, and the Party continues to embrace every liberal cause that comes down the pike.
It’s way past time to focus single mindedly on one objective—get elected. Principles and high minded causes are worth next to nothing if you can’t put them into practice.
8
The hysterics and anarchy aren't about Kavanaugh...
It's a proxy battle and a dry run - for when Trump nominates Barrett to replace Bader Ginsburg...
As usual, the progressives are clueless - that this prospect will likely increase the GOP share of midterm votes by a half percent or more...
8
We've seen this before. Susan Collins only likes to appear to have a spine, but will yield yet again.
One could make this about the social issues, but it's really more about executive and corporate power issues. Democrats want the money that comes from making it about social issues (because that's what their donor base prefers to care about), and so yet again leave the issues of executive overreach, class and inequality neglected. If they do so yet again, it will be yet again another failure of strategy.
5
The PR campaign isn't really about Kavanaugh. This is a get-out-the-vote drive. McConnell could force through a confirmation in a matter of weeks, not months. Republicans aren't going to do that though. They're going to drag the issue out and blame Democrats for the delay. Fire up the base and try to minimize loses in a blue wave election. Democrats are obviously attempting the same tactic on their own terms. This is about midterms more than SCOTUS.
6
We don't allow prospective jurors who think the defendant is guilty, before the trial, to sit on the jury. So why should Senators who announced opposition to a judicial nominee, before that person was even named, be allowed to vote? The same goes for those presidential contenders announcing opposition within minutes of the nomination. Kavanaugh has written over 300 opinions during a decade on the bench. It's one thing to have an honest difference of opinion with his rulings/views. It's another to have a completely closed mind, especially as Supreme Court nominees don't always rule as the presidents who appointed them expected them to do.
4
Battle ? What 'battle' ? The 'battle' that counted was lost in Nov 2016. Just confirm Kavanaugh and move on. It's not like Trump is going to nominate anyone that the Democrats are going to be happy with. These people 'won' in '16 by working the EC. Learn something by it and maybe change strategy for the next 'battle' that counts. Nov 2020.
10
You are obviously not a woman, nor are you someone who is very aware of the destruction to the planet that humans have wrought. America stands for freedom of CHOICE. A woman should have the choice, along with her partner, doctor and/or God, as to what the best option is for her. You are spouting baseless arguments against a stranger's choice. It's literally none of your business why a woman would opt for an abortion. Maybe she's abused. Maybe she's ill. Maybe she needs life-saving chemotherapy or other medical treatment. Maybe the baby is ill or not developing. Maybe the baby is already dead or dying. All of these reasons or none of these reasons are none of your business. You would do well with some introspection as to why you are so concerned with others' personal decision on focus more on your own intolerance.
4
Was it ok with you when the GOP blocked President Obama's appointment of a Supreme Court justice? The GOP is a bunch of hypocrites set out to destroy the freedoms that this country is based upon. No, we should not "just appoint him and move on." That is called complacency.
3
The time to fight was two years ago. Democrats, liberals and "progressives" who professed to care about the issues that Kavanaugh needed to turn out and vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016. This was so painfully obvious to all of us old enough to remember Bush v Gore and/or with any sense of history about Roosevelt's New Deal legislation and the Civil Rights movement. Hats off to the GOP who brutally play the long game to achieve their nefarious goals of controlling the court for the next two generations. They endorsed the loathsome Trump, got out their hypocritical "values" voters - and did whatever it took to win the court. Us Democrats - for all our so called "elitism" - couldn't remember to go and vote - no matter how you felt about Ms. Clinton - if you had any liberal values that you cared about - you needed to vote.
17
“It will be a battle unlike any we have seen in history,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut.
You have to laugh at this kind of ridiculous hyperbole. We've seen court nominees opposed quite a few times. A former sergeant in the Marines should know better.
6
Not sure how the Dems are going to fight back when they're protecting multiple red state senate seats.
And they have no spine, so there's that too...
Watch Schumer fold like a cheap table in less than a week.
This fight was fought in 2016. SCOTUS vacancies were a very well-known issue before the election.
Republicans held their noses and voted for Trump. It was important to them.
Not enough Democrats thought it was important. 3.7 million fewer of us voted in 2016 than in 2008, and of those a significant number did not vote for Hillary.
This is a done issue. No do-overs. Now, we need the Dems in red states (Donnelly, Heitkamp, Manchin) to back Trump's pick so we can keep them in the Senate for future issues.
8
Given that this Presidency was lost by a mere 20K+ votes in Michigan and Wisconsin, I would rest blame for the state we are in on:
1. Bernie supporters who voted for Trump in anger especially in these states.
2. All voters who chose not to vote in the 2016 election.
3. All voters who voted for Jill Stein
4. Jill Stine
16
Let me fix your list, you forgot these two:
1. Hillary Clinton, who ran a bloodless, uninspired, message-free campaign, and ignored key states like WI and PA; or
1a. The Democratic party, who put up literally the only candidate that could have lost.
1
Winning by 3 million votes is uninspiring? Bernie was not a candidate. So rather than suck it up and vote in the larger interest of the nation you would rather not vote or vote for Trump/ losing candidate?
Supreme Court Justices should should serve for one 12 year term. Just like the Electoral College that needs to be done away with, it does not serve either side to keep out-of-date mechanisms in government....Lifetime appointments to the court as well as giving the Presidency to the loser of the election really is counter intuitive.
10
Agreed!
1
I blame Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Bernie would be our president had she not interfered.
7
o_0 Clinton won 3 million more votes than Sanders in the Democratic primaries.
3
Maybe we should all thank The Times and its readers who supported Harry Reid's nuclear option, and ended the filibuster for judicial nominees. Yes, the Democrats got some extra judges under Obama. Now Trump will get his judges. Was it worth it for some short term gain?
9
Obama did not get his "extra judges". Mitch McConnell stalled those appointments the same way he did Merritt Garland.
2
Like the adult we have in the White House now? Please.
1
Has the phrase, "Elections have consequences" ever been more meaningful, and is it not glaringly obvious why the GOP embraces a sleazy huckster as president?
Shifting the SCOTUS rightward will certainly boost the two traditional conservative goals:
1. Preservation of individual and corporate wealth.
2. Returning the country to that halcyon era where the proper people ran things and "sinfulness" was punished.
I keep reminding myself that the political winds shift back and forth, and those in power tend to over-reach. That helps a little.
6
This is the same guy who urged for the impeachment of Bill Clinton, but where was he during the more recent sexual harassment accusations against Donald Trump???
9
As usual the NYT is way over stating it. Sounds like the Enquirer. There is not going to be a battle. The Republicans will vote him in. Both sides of the aisle will ask many many stupid questions and he will try not to roll his eyes and will be nice. And then he will sit on the court and be amazed how stupid all of Congress is and he won't be surprised that Congress has a 13% approval rating. He is not going to be any Scalia, he will be much like Kennedy, just like Roberts is. Lawyers, especially ones on the Supreme Court could care less what Congress or the public in general think.
18
That didn't work on the repeal of Obamacare did it
1
That's a lot of money for not changing a single mind.
8
The people on the left should be happy about this choice. He is the most left of all of Trump's choices. He is also an establishment, insider cultivated by Bush. Karl Rove was his mentor. The never-Trumpers should be excited about this pick and since there is not much difference between these swamp creatures and establishment Democrats, anyone who is not a populist or civil libertarian should be elated by this pick. The political grandstanding is just histrionics and the poisonous responses coming from progressive lefties is insane. So dishonorable, cowardly and weak it's hard to believe that foolish people like this exist in this country. A product of loathsome evil and stunted intelligence. They are acting light spoiled rotten children. Elections have consequences. The media and the left was going to oppose whatever choice was made. The protest signs were printed even before the decision was made. Suggestion: take deep breaths, look at it objectively, see it as the best of a very bad situation, stop whinging and wait your turn. About 50 years from now you'll have the chance to re-shape the court. That said, Kavanaugh clerked for Kennedy and will probably fall along the lines of David Suitor and John Roberts. Roe v. Wade won't go away, however, it will be chipped away in states that don't agree with it. If anything, this choice just confirms the direction of this country: kleptocratic oligarchy.
6
Everyone can see that all pretense is gone; the Supreme Court is pure political smashmouth football now.
Most commentary sees this battle in the Senate as harming the Democrats Heitkamp, Manchin, Donelly, Tester, presuming that voting against Trump's pick will cause them to lose in their states. One suspects that Trump and the Republicans relish this and see it as a great side benefit of nominating Kavanaugh.
But a moment's thought should conclude that any voter who strongly supports Kavanaugh's appointment will never vote for a Democrat, or even a "Rockefeller Republican" if such a thing still existed (closest survivor is Collins of Maine).
Appointing Kavanaugh is a pure play to try to reward Trump's "base" and hold the evangelicals. The Democratic senators in question here have already written off those voters -- only a fool would think they could craft any appeal to them anyway.
Trump's idea is that he will get a two-fer; get the supreme court justice who might save him from indictment, and rile up his base to solidify his control of the party, solidify its transition to an "authoritarian" white-power personality cult.
But this won't work in terms of any national vote, and it probably won't work in the swing states either. The chances of energizing liberals (and shifting moderates) in these states are larger than the value of energizing Trump's base.
There are a heck of a lot more young left-leaning voters in those states who didn't vote, and could.
4
What battle? Kavanaugh will have some testy hearings. He will evasive and not answer questions. We will hear again that he will do away with Roe vs. Wade, that he is against the ACA, and that he thinks a sitting president should not be indicted (the reason Trump nominated him). The two 'leftish' Republican Senators will squirm a bit. In the end Kavanaugh will be confirmed by all Republicans and some conservative Democrats just as Gorsuch was. I don't know why there needs to be a story of a battle generated. I will be happy if I'm proven wrong though.
5
Of course there's going to be a fight, because it's a stolen seat.
I may not have liked Scalia or Thomas, but they were appointed at a time when Congress did its Constitutional duty and gave the nominees of both Republican and Democratic presidents a hearing.
The Republicans have complete contempt for democracy at this point and unlike them I'm American enough to believe in it.
They are traitors to everything this country stands for and their Supreme Court appointment has no more validity than any act of dictatorship.
28
I guess Hillary forgot the difference between deep support in a few large coastal cities and the broad support across the country that is needed for an electoral majority. The US Constitution is designed to require candidates to get broad support across the country, like the battleground states that Obama won twice. Unfortunately, as Hillary's supporters were telling Bernie that those superdelegates at the DNC were part of the "rules" he should have known about, Hillary forgot the US Constitution and the need for broad support across the country.
9
Kavanaugh is a qualified judge and there is little to fight about. I may disagree with him on lots of issues, but there is no objective basis we know of to oppose his appointment. Under the rules in the Senate, the opposition will all be for show. Had Trump nominated someone of dubious distinction, that would be a different story. Let's focus our energy on the November elections.
15
Forced birth. You favor forced birth and imposing your will on others who don't have fortunes.
If you are looking for those bowing down to the gods of lust and ambition look no further than the president, the administration, and family.
3
Dubious distinction? With the current party I believe that Michel Cohen or Roy Moore would be confirmed with language such as "The President should get to pick his team. We will support him."
2
Imagine if all the money both sides plan to spend were put toward helping suffering people rather than further dividing this country. It's an obscene amount that could be used for so many beneficial purposes. Of course, everyone would then argue about what causes/people are deserving of the funds.
15
Trump loses the popular vote by more than 2.8 million Americans' ballots; "rules" as if he won a mandate. Or as if he needed no vote at all, thanks to the divine right of kings.
13
Trump won 30 states and a clear majority of electoral votes, which is how we elect Presidents in this country. He's no doubt well aware of his title. You seem unaware as to the process.
10
This article misses the key question in this nomination. During the hearings the Democratic senators should be insisting on the answer as to whether Kavanaugh will recuse himself from any Supreme Court case involving Trump himself. It is an obvious conflict of interest. The same can be said of Gorsuch.
5
It's funny in a way. Congress is preparing us for the battle of the century when there will really be no battle at all. Republicans control Congress so any perceived battle will be for show.
4
We're at a crossroads in this country. The donor class, with help from the ever-plotting GOP, have almost completed their coup of our democracy.
The fact that the choice of Supreme Court justices is being outsourced to radical conservative groups like the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation is proof that the Republican party is only interested in grabbing power and not in maintaining democratic norms.
14
As a former member of the Federalist Society, I can tell you that it is no radical group. It's just conservative lawyers who want the constitution interpreted as intended, and who oppose unelected judges making rights out of thin air. Stop the hyperbole.
4
DRS,
With all due respect, if the Federalist Society believes that women should be forced by the state to give birth should they become pregnant, I consider that a radical stance.
Do they?
3
Looks like the Republicans have the votes to confirm him. What purpose is served by pontificating or spending money on a lost cause?
5
Well said. There is no purpose other than an already incompetent House & Senate "grandstanding" for their respective zealots. The bigger issue is protection of the Constitution (..and this Kavanaugh seems to be of this ilk) & it's importance from these trendy emotional, one-issue "activist" clowns & their surrogates. The media, of course, thrives on a great show, so they are all in!
1
neither side of the political divide has any implied or explicit control of the supreme court. Any one who thinks otherwise is dreaming. Over the years the judicial and the executive branches have poached functions which properly belong in the legislative; A truly constitutionally oriented court would reverse that trend. We shouldn't be governed by 9 people in robes behind a closed door or one guy with a pen and a phone.
5
Today's NY Times has an article that puzzles why a majority of Americans think the US is corrupt
Fast forward to Judge selection on the US's highest court.
".. a battle royale between conservative and liberal interest groups that will last all summer and into fall, costing tens of millions of dollars"
NONE of the groups pouring millions of dollars has the best interest of working Americans at heart - the average American worker to poor to donate significant amounts.
But it is perfectly legal for the Uber-rich, that got rich on the back of American workers, to "buy" in to Supreme Court selection.
15
I'm a Democrat, but would prefer that the D's not become entangled in a protracted fight over this, for two reasons:
1. It is pointless. If Kavanaugh is not nominated, some other right-wing conservative judge will be. I cannot see a great ending to any of this.
2. In view of #1, I would rather "go high" on this. I think the culture is shifting in the direction of the Dems, and victories will come, if only we let them. If we engage in protracted fights over every little thing, we muddle the greater messages re battling income inequality and sexism, racism, and bigotry, which should be the core of the party's values. Trump is a step back, but he will be followed by two steps forward, if only we don't ruin it through rank pettiness and squabbling.
5
With no moral reasoning and only a weak rationalization behind their decision, the Republicans had no problem blocking the nomination of Garland, a legitimate pick of a legitimate president.
But today the Senate, including its Republican members, are actually duty-bound to delay this nomination-- the pick of a president very likely to be proven illegitimately elected-- until after Mueller's report is released.
Do I think that even a single Republican will perform his or her patriotic duty here? Let's just say the party has given me no reason over the past 30 months to believe that will happen.
4
“No president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination,” Kavanaugh said.
really - and he is going to be impartial and not political? Elections do have consequences - especially in a blatantly rigged system.
12
Thanks to the Democrat’s beloved Harry Reid and his “nuclear option” that the vast majority of NYT readers supported, there will be no real battle whatsoever. The Republicans will simply approve the nominee with 51 votes. Thank you Harry and all of you that supported his nuclear option.
8
Dems only need one Rep to flip if they all come together. You think Susan Collins is going to go with Kavanaugh? I don’t think so
Indeed..you reap what you sow. Democrats have also gotten a hard lesson recently in that he who lives by executive action..dies by executive action.
5
A fight which might end up in a Pyrrhic victory for Trump is worth fighting.
1
Any Democrat who votes in favor of this person to join the SCOTUS should be considered persona non grata by the Democratic party. Let them join the Republican party. Simple.
2
Kavanaugh and his fellows at Federalist Society seek to undermine every progressive achievement of the past 100 years. After the Triangle shirtwaist fire 107 years ago New Yorkers got together and created labor laws that were the blueprint for the progressive era and later the New Deal. Some of them were undone by the Lochner decision but were later upheld. Under the guise of so called originalism they seek to not only go back to the Lochner era but gut the Fair Labor Standards act, the NLRB as well as OSHA which was created under Nixon. To them, the 40 hour week, overtime, the weekend and workplace safety are unconstitutional. Stressing this is just as important as Roe and Griswold.
15
I find despicable both the Republican refusal to consider the nomination of Judge Garland, as well as the Democrats’ promise to fight by all means Judge Kavanaugh, simply because he is Trump’s nominee.
Instead of trying to “paint” a nominee into a scarecrow, the Democrats would be better advised to win elections, for President as well as for Congress. Of course, if they choose the Socialist way, we will eventually end with all-Republican Supreme Court.
"the days of bipartisan confirmations of the sort experienced by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg — whose nomination was approved by a 96-to-3 vote — are long gone. "
Right. When liberals want to stick a hard-left fellow traveler on the Court, Republicans played "bipartisan" and confirmed RBG 96-3 (thank God for three Senators with spines). But an amply qualified conservative jurist must hope to get 50-50 + 1. Yes, bipartisanship is gone ... and the Left killed it. Their idea of "tolerance" -- my ideas, you agree.
5
No "president" under investigation should be able to choose a SCOTUS seat. Fair enough?
15
So Bill Clinton should have had no appointments?
4
Did you complain when Bill Clinton nominated two Supreme Court justices while under investigation?
1
An investigation into an affair is not a criminal investigation....
2
Liberals "fight" by wailing and whining about facts, logic, objectivity and rational reason.
Conservatives fight by denying and ignoring all of those things.
Appeals to our innate fish amphibian reptile brain fight or flight basal fears are always more compelling and entertaining and successful than any appeal to our primate ape dreams and hopes.
There is a reason that Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin is still smiling and smirking about how he has played the last three American Presidents for naive boyish fools. Putin sends his foes to hospitals, mental institutions, prisons, urns and coffins. No one has suffered any of those fates by a Donald John Trump, Sr. tweet or speech.
2
Not yet. Let's see what his puppet master, Putin, has to say.
1
"Conservative and Liberal Groups Gird for Battle Over Kavanaugh"
You misspelled "The Latest Distraction, Direct From the Fog Machine."
I do home someone's watching the till - Social Security and Medicare particularly, but also natural resources and land (fiscal oversight is gone), because this is the oldest thieves' game in the book.
5
I don't care one whit about the court tilting to the right because I'm a white male that has everything. I don't need to consider a pregnancy, and I don't have to be worried about being shot by cops because I'm not black. So a "right" leaning "supreme" court (which is anything but supreme) has no bearing on me . Now my great grand kids may tell a different tale someday, but what, me worry? The only issue now is whether that kennedy shill will refuse to have trump answer to the feds. Trump is a dirty, conniving grifter and his cherry picked judge will now protect him. Just what the founders wanted - a thieving traitorous, con man, protected by a judge from the highest court in the land. Ain't America great?
4
Time to announce a beloved in Mainer to primary Collins—Stephen King.
2
Oh the boogie man!! First the Russians and now a judge. The DNC has no bottom and continues to sink to lows unforeseen in this country.
5
This is ridiculous. President Trump does not need a single Democrat vote to confirm Kavanaugh, so this is empty posturing. The few potential Republican “no” votes will never reject every name on the Federalist Society list. So the only real question is whether there are other jurists on the list whom Democrats or Progressives feel are better choices. It may well be that Kavanaugh is as good a choice as is actually available. In fact, too much meaningless posturing may well solidify Republican voters and turn off independents.
3
Some questions for Kavanaugh
1. Are we a nation of laws?
2. Is there anyone under US jurisdiction who can claim to be above the law?
3. Can a person be his own judge or act to determine the outcome of his own case under US law?
4. Is there any textual basis in the US Constitution or current US law for the position that a president should not be subject to investigation or not be required to testify to a grand jury?
5. Did you or did you not write in the Whitewater report that President Clinton should have been subject to impeachment for lying to the American public?
6. Do you have any opinion about the case of former Judge Walter L. Nixon Jr, a then sitting federal official who was indicted, tried, and convicted, and later impeached, convicted and removed? (In 1986, Nixon was convicted of lying to a federal grand jury. He refused to resign. He was impeached in 1989. The Supreme Court upheld his impeachment and conviction.)
7. With regard to impeachment, does the Constitution distinguish between the president and any other government official other that by the phrase “When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside”?
8. Has Donald Trump asked your opinion about any of the questions I have asked?
9. Have you expressed an opinion about any of the questions I have asked to Donald Trump?
10. If confirmed, would you recuse yourself if any matter that involved Donald Trump in other than his ex officio capacity came before the Supreme Court?
16
How’s this a “battle?” Democrats don’t have the votes.
4
Trump's war on America is escalating.Trump uses Putin; Russia; Evangelicals; Hate; Racism ; everything. Fight against everything Trump; while you can. We may all be behind bars if Trump gets his way. Ray Sipe
2
Dems should stop whining over this. He is a legitimate candidate for the conservative GOP.
Dems should be kicking themselves in the rear for letting McConnel steal the Garland appointment. This was an inexcusable political calculation. Trying to make up for it now is embarrassing.
5
It is difficult for me to comprehend why individuals would want to eliminate their own posterity. This is one of the issues that is causing the western culture to crumble, and disappear. People need to have babies in order to continue propagating their family lines and values. We as a people need to think more of ourselves. I can understand the less than 1% health exception or rape issues, but these should be the only ones needed. It is not generally used for these purposes, but to escape child rearing. Studies have shown that abortion is not healthy or safe. It is bad for the woman emotionally, and can cause health problems as well. No good can come of it. Why do people deny the science of human life? The answer is they are bowing down to the gods of lust and ambition. Stop listening to the NWO propaganda machine that uses mindless talking points to brainwash you to accept their agenda. Remember your parents, grandparents, and great grandparents, and the joy of family life. It will bless you more than you could ever imagine.
2
So what happens when they take away birth control? What happens if a condom breaks? What happens if the life of the child is predicted to be next to nothing due to a health condition and the mother comes from a poor background? Is all that science going to help pay for the medical needs? Nope, because you want these women to have babies no matter their situation, and then just leave them to deal with it because women’s health is a joke in our country. But hey, it’s precious life so it’s ok as long as the heart is beating. Who cares if that child may suffer the rest of their life.
2
If she has the baby, will you support that woman financially with health care, food and other essential services that are necessary for her health and that of the baby? If yes you may have a case, if you won't support helping the mother and child you can simply shut up and go away.
5
Do you have a uterus?
1
The Democrats should frame this fight around issues that Trump supporters are concerned about like income inequality, healthcare for people with pre-existing conditions, etc.
Democrats have to be more strategic when it comes to fighting the Republicans.
8
It's no surprise that such detailed coverage was available within minutes of President Trump's announcement of his Supreme Court nominee. All the media have had these stories and editorials ready to go for days. There were 4 "top picks", and a week is more than enough time to prepare detailed pieces on 4 people. It's like having canned obituaries for celebrities; the boiler-plate text and images are already done, all that is needed is a bit of updating before the final product is ready to print, post or broadcast.
Here's my own prediction, written (I swear) hours before the President's announcement: The choice doesn't matter.
Whoever Trump picked, the mainstream media would launch a salvo of articles and opinion (scare) pieces explaining why the pick is terrible for women, LGBTQs, migrants, poor people, abortion supporters, in fact pretty much everyone else except the notorious 1% and big business. The media would also say the Supreme Court will now be biased or even irrelevant.
The purposes of the barrage, of course, are to draw all but negative attention away from the nominee and to agitate the Democrat-liberal-socialist-radical base.
In fact, there is little the roused rabble can do about this; Trump pretty much has the votes to confirm. However, stay tuned for the mass breast-beating, hand-wringing, wailing, virtue-signaling, "spontaneous" protests, and accosting Republicans in restaurants.
What are Democrats to do? Get out the vote in November!
6
Pragmatically the Democrats need to focus their resources on the mid-terms. There is no way to stop this nominee thanks to power abuser McConnell.
5
Trump proves celebrity is electable. Time to apply pressure and announce the intention to primary Collins and Murkowski #StephenKingforSenate
4
What a fine mess!
Almost comical in all its moving parts.
Americans will choke on the prospect of being excluded from health insurance for pre-conditions.
Show little kids who will be denied coverage.
Show a woman with breast cancer who is denied coverage because she was treated for acne when she was a teenager.
This kind of thing used to happen.
People forget the bad old days before the ACA (Obamacare) straightened these issues out.
They need to be reminded and appropriately scared.
Won't matter anyway.
Kavanaugh will be confirmed.
He's actually a well regarded judge by even some liberals.
Vote, Democrats and Independents, like a heard of horses thundering across the plain!
Vote and stay involved because the Republican party is now a nest of radicals who would even accept the help of a Russian dictator to maintain power.
They have forsaken America for power.
They have gone insane.
Only a concerted effort to block them and shame and discredit their insanity will save the nation now.
50
There really doesn’t seem to be too much to say about people’s activism. It sort of speaks for itself. Placard makers love it. Big banner printers must sell tons of ink for HP.
1
What silliness...the protesters on the steps of the Supreme Court last night had signs pre-written with a fill in the blank for the name of nominee and were protesting before the nomination was even made. Please democrats, please maintain this level of silliness and rude behavior for all to see. It will continue to energize the Republican base in November and ensure that President Trump not only maintains but expands the share of Republican seats in the House and Senate.
8
If the Democrats couldn't keep stop the confirmation of Clarence Thomas, they ain't gonna stop this guy. They are notoriously lousy in these kind of fights.
5
How about Bork?
1
Lets all start this most important phase of the resistance by no longer calling the dangerous people destroying our country "pro life." Nothing could be further from the truth. The ultra rich using the ignorant to accumulate even more power and wealth is truly evil.
43
You are conflating your enemies. I'd guess that most of the "ultra-rich" don't care if you have an abortion or not..THAT pressure is coming from religious conservatives. And the sizeable portion of the population that equates abortion with killing babies.
Well, at least all you voters who abstained or voted for Jill Stein can still point to your "clear/clean" conscience with pride!
4
Let’s face it. This is chaos. There is no leadership. Everyone is scrambling in their own mice hole.
Lord of the Flies!
3
Why bother? He'll be confirmed either 51-49, or 51-50. At this point, the Democrats might as well just collect a paycheck and watch conservative greed and incompetence burn America to the ground.
6
Dems should concentrate on battles they can win...how about a message for the party in 2018 that is better than "A Better Deal" ? Pretty low bar to come up with something better than that to run on, IMHO
4
This is nothing.
The real fight will come if and when Trump gets the chance to replace a left-wing judge (RBG?)
There will be blood in the streets.
2
the photo with this article says it all
the absurd man - yikes - take a look at that
a religious extremist
reminds me of the old line
if men had to give birth abortion would be a sacrament
4
You have read a lot into a photograph. Best to remember that many of the pro-lifers are even more committed to their cause than the most ardent of the pro-choicers, for one reason. You believe you are protecting women's rights and reproductive choice. They believe they are stopping baby-killers.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh evinces the kind of slavish dogmatic thinking—hewing to a quasi-religious bended-knee myth of founding fathers—that is a danger to us all.
That is why people are so upset with this risk of unbalancing the Supreme Court for years to come.
“Original intent” and “framers” are the watchwords and cover for these types of religious-right judges.
“Original intent”?—that’s way back in the 1700s with a completely different country and world.
“Framers”?—they are long gone and out of touch with our times; why do they get to “frame” the discussion now?
2
So an inflamed majority or overzealous government cannot remove the rights of minorities and individuals. Given current times, I suggest you give this some serious thought.
1
Only mass public demonstrations in the streets across the country can prevent the continued criminal activity of this administration. Money and votes are not enough as proven by so many non-violent civil disobedience movements against wars, racism and other cultural and social injustices. Sleepers awake !
3
What a complete waste of time and resources!
The 2016 election was the time and place to stand up for American values.
Instead college students did not bother to vote, minorities had their reasons, Russians convinced Americans on social media thanks to Facebook, that Senator Clinton was flawed, and lots of pure, gluten free, GMO free voters wasted their vote on a 2016 Ralph Nader candidate, financed by the Republicans.
Now women pull their hair and shout "me three?"
Sorry America, you snooze, you lose!
8
Gee, reading some of the more hysterical comments here, the liberals and progressivei will soon be exercising their Second Amendment rights and will be arming up for the Civil War they are going to start.
11
Wishful thinking! Your positive recommendations will never happen with the sleeping DNC!
8
The DNC needs to get into the news and promote themselves. Why are they sleeping? Can anyone name the chair of the DNC? Neither could I!
6
I guess it technically still is a "battle" when one side is armed with machine guns and the other side is armed with slingshots but in terms of suspense there is more excitement in watching a rerun of Battle of the Network Stars than there is in seeing how the "battle" over Judge Kavanaugh turns out.
8
Agreed! But the Democrats are using large-sized BB's to fight the dirty-rat Republicans with their machine guns!
2
If one of the Democratic Senators has the guts to ask it the question for Kavanaugh is; The President of the United States has said that he could get away with shooting someone on Fifth Avenue. If the President did this and it was witnessed and video taped do you think he should be indicted for this crime while in office?
8
Sometimes you have to destroy the village in order to save it. When our Vietnam War strategy is our only hope to save our democracy we know we are in trouble.
It looks like things are going to have to get much worse before the Trump supporters are going to let us fix this mess.
5
I love the chutzpah expressed in that last sentence, Ronny. Perhaps that’s why we have the mess in the first place?
I agree, fifty years of conservatism has taken us to the brink of fascism. That is a fine mess we are in.
If the Republicans become identified with dismantling Roe v. Wade they'll never win another national election. The women I know aren't about to just roll over on this; indeed, it will make the "Me Too" movement look like a walk in the park. All this will do in addition to making the Republican brand even more toxic is to further disunite the United States. As with the federal law pertaining to marijuana that is becoming increasingly irrelevant as states legalize it, so it will be with abortion. The same dynamic is at play with the FCC ruling on net neutrality, as states and municipalities nevertheless enforce it in other ways. Slowly we will become a loose confederation of states, which is perhaps how it must be, given that the values of the so-called "Bible Belt" are not those of the west or east coast states. The silver lining may be a healthy disdain for Big Brother.
8
For the last 30 years the Democrats have played by the rules while Republicans have acted like mobsters, stealing elections and court appointments, cynically basing campaigns on pure lies and deception.
And the Democrats. Meekly cowering to it all. Refusing to stand up for liberal values. Triangulating to appease and in the end never making the fight for their beliefs.
All the while Republicans have defined the issues while Democrats played defence.
Now we have a one party system unbridled by rule of law sinking into despotism.
23
If you think ANY politician plays by the rules, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
The democrats have no one but themselves to blame for their current lack of representation in the US Govt. The octogenarians running the party have been there so long there is no bench to draw from - there's a 50 year gap in players.
12
Kavanaugh had better take his daily multi-vitamin, because against a tsunami of detractors he's going to need all the fortification he can get.
2
Sound and fury signifying nothing. Mitch will quarterback this pick and have him in his seat by Oct. 1. Everything else is bluster and posturing. Greatest circus act is about to begin. I know I'll be watching, can't wait for the Dems to get all high and mighty. It will be mostly about playing to the respective bases, trying to score the most points for the Nov. election. Talk about a swamp!
5
It is sad to see the US revert back to the times of bigotry and ignorance which most of us thought had been left behind for good. It is sad, but is not surprising, after all, ignorance, bigotry and racism are the very essence of America, the only nation in history founded on the premise that slavery is consistent with freedom. Rather than cleaning off their founding sin, Americans embrace it.
7
There’s no real battle here. The real battle is at the polls in November. Will dems bother to show up?
14
For Democrats (and I am one) this is a foolish fight to get into. Kavanaugh is not some right wing loon, he is more conservative than we'd like him to be, but that's a function of the "election" (and I use quotation marks advisedly) of Trump. Frankly, considering the quality of Trump's intellect and judgment, I'm relieved it's only Kavanaugh. Anyway, the votes are just not there to block this, so just get on with it and keep the powder dry for a battle we can win. Otherwise we look like a howling mob bent on destroying a qualified nominee for political reasons.
24
Time for all anarchist to come together to destroy democracy.
They do not believe in Obama's declaration that "elections have consequences".
4
Parents get their kids to eat their vegetables by asking if they want to eat peas first, or carrots.
The Federalist Society picks 3 nominees and Trump picks one so it looks like there was a choice.
The GOP comes up with 16 goofballs for their primary and the media picks one.
We The People are not children!
This is no way to run a democracy.
8
Democracy has been just one of many theories, either it proves real or not. it’s pointless to try and dictate what the outcome should be, others may have other ideas for the same, unless you’re advocating for that?
Another waste of time. Democrats mistake "fighting" for representation and progress. It's one long wasteful battle after another. Democrats should just set up a political "Fight Club" for its left wing instead of wasting their time indulging it.
9
We're headed for some massive and likely violent civil unrest. It's practically inevitable when there's a sociopathic, wreckless president who has encouraged violence on numerous occasions, and is fully enabled and supported by millions of people I'll never understand, and a Republican Party that is nothing but extremism. The Constitution is irrelevant to people like McConnell and Ryan.
A reckoning is indeed coming, and it likely take the country to the edge of dissolution.
4
If only liberals had been this amped up to elect a Democratic President in 2016, we wouldn't be in this mess. This is all a complete dog and pony show, a total waste of time. Kavanaugh is getting confirmed. Every Republican will vote for him, along with a half-dozen Democrats. This battle was fought on November 7, 2016, and liberals chose spite over their own interests and the good of the country.
If you didn't vote for Hillary Clinton, this is 100% your fault. Elections have consequences. A lot of Republicans had serious misgivings about Donald Trump, and they all voted for him anyway, many for this very seat. It's too bad the left didn't have the same foresight.
To quote the president: sad!
71
Unless there is something extraordinary that comes up during the confirmation hearings for Mr. Kavanaugh I think (based on the NYTimes chart) this is the best the Democrats can hope to get. With the mid term elections coming up the Dems should probably lick their wounds and vote quickly for confirmation. Any push for delay would make the Dems look obstructionist and possibly jeopardize their chances of possibly taking back control of either the House or Senate.
3
"Demand Justice, which acts as a kind of Democratic counterpart to Judicial Crisis Network, expects to spend more than $5 million on advertising, said its executive director, Brian Fallon."
Maybe if Hillary had spent $5 million in WI or PA when Fallon was on the campaign, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
10
Touché. Well done.
Will the Kavanaugh confirmation be as nasty as the Bork and Thomas confirmations? I don't see how it can be.
Sadly I don't believe the Democrats will fight this battle to the extremes that the GOP would. They should do anything and everything they can to delay a vote until after the mid term elections.
The next two weeks should show us if this will happen, if when we turn on the nightly news and within 5 minutes the coverage is about Kavanaugh's nomination, we will know the fight is still on.
5
The best way to challenge an ideology is with its practical implications. The best way to challenge the conservative ideology is with mass demonstrations by those who suffer from its practical implications. Massive demonstrations covering a wide range of issues between now and the confirmation vote will be more effective than advertising campaigns where misleading statements function as well or better than the truth. It is necessary to promote and act out of a vision for a better future that all can see and appreciate. This isn't just about the conservative nominee, it is about all sitting Justices and the need is to demonstrate for them where the country is headed not where it came from, it is about people in the streets speaking truth to power.
2
Make no mistake -- the money that will be spent on the battle to confirm Kavanaugh is being spent mostly by the super rich such as the Koch brothers. The point of this spending on their part is to guarantee the rights of the rich and to minimize the rights of the rest of us. Since Gorsuch has joined the cart, we have lost labor rights. Certainly Roe vs. Wade is Trump's major target. If it is repealed it will mean a choice between forced pregancy and illegal abortion for women. It is completely unclear to me why they want to keep women out of the work force, which is what having a lot of children means since economists believe admitting women to the work force has been a big economic boon for the country. Make no mistake, this nomination will help move the US toward fascism which is synonomous with corporatism.
5
The one consolation for Democrats in a confirmed Kavanaugh is that, with the Justice already confirmed, Republicans won't have as much motivation to vote in a highly consequential midterm election. Democrats, however, will turn out in droves.
3
There should be no Advise and Consent, as McConnell and the Republicans did not do their Constitutional Duty when Justice Garland was nominated to the Supreme Court by President Obama.
Refresh our memory, no Advise and Consent during an Election year!
Let the Voters decide in November.
1
This is a waste of time. The dems cannot stop this. They simply don’t have the votes in the Senate. The smarter strategy is to use this moment to: (1) point to the fact that conservative courts have been bad for working people and (2) the only way to make a change is at the ballot box, so vote in the mid-terms. Getting distracted by fighting losing battles will only make the dems look weak and focus people on the wrong vote. The key vote is at the ballot in November.
1
This is just wrong. We have all sorts of political manipulation and special interest involved, resulting in a court that is highly partisan and does not represent the people. We should be voting for Supreme Court judges (with popular vote!) and get rid of this system were open seats can influence other elections.
All of this frothing about the mouth is fruitless. It doesn't matter that the pick is Kavanaugh. ANY pick from the Federalist list would have produced the same reaction. And, if Kavanaugh is turned back, the next pick will be similar, or worse.
Democrats have to accept that there really is no way to avoid a conservative Trump pick for this vacancy. They can't get enough votes to turn back every consecutive pick for years. Only if they can delay confirmation for someone until they might take back control of the Senate beginning in 2019 and then not confirm any Trump pick for 2 more years will they avoid the result.
Can anyone really see a vacancy that remains for 3 years? Pretty doubtful if not unimaginable. We're stuck with a Trump pick, period. Time to face the fact that elections have consequences. Hang on Judge Ginsburg. Don't let him have yet another pick!
4
The sky is falling down. I would prefer a much farther to the liberal spectrum nomination, but that's the way our system of government works under the Constitution, and Trump is the president. We are in a true Hegelian dialectic. Democratic agonizing won't change a thing (they don't have a cogent message anyway, to my great dismay). No one can predict the future, but it can have a remarkable way of surprising us all. Or not.
1
RE: A Confirmation Fight ‘Unlike Any We Have Seen in History’
That's true. Without the use of the filibuster and only a simply majority needed to confirm there is really is no fight, though some may claim to battle, so it is pretty much unlike others. Except for Gorsuch. With the same result. And a newly installed king maker (literally).
5
How can anyone call this a battle Royale? With the final republican throttling of the Supreme Court filibuster last April, this fight was over before it has begun. Apparently, a generation of women, minorities, workers and voters must feel the sting of the resulting loss of their hard-won rights and freedoms to motivate them to change things, or preserve what we value. The right has been working for this moment diligently since 1973. We on the left have falsely assumed that progress moves only in one direction. We are about to learn otherwise.
1
Thanks Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and DNC for rigging the primary and taking away the only candidate that could beat Trump. Now we live with the consequences for decades.
8
Remind us who that was again? It seems so long ago.
Rigged. How?
But you can tell us how a socialist wanted to crash the Democratic primary and use the party to his own ends (as Trump did more successfully).
1
But what is that you expect from these so-called conservative judges?
So what good is the spending of all that good money going to accomplish? Let's say the Kavanaugh nomination is rejected. The Heritage Foundation, the Republicans and Trump have a lineup of candidates to follow...and they could be worse than Kavanaugh. There is only one benefit of delaying the process...the Democrats take over the Senate in November. However, the Democrats still have to deal with the fact that there are 3, maybe 4, Republicans in Democratic cloth. Think Heitikamp for example.
2
I don't understand why they keep digging. I assume it's because (a) their left wing is forcing them to behave in this unpopular fashion and (b) old habits die hard. They are still using old tactics in a completely new game. Trump changed everything, and the best they can do is fact check his tweets.
Liberals can protest all they like, but their days in the sun are (thankfully) over. In addition to his two SCOTUS picks (in just his first two years in office), President Trump has nominated over 40 judges to the Federal appeals and district courts, which have been confirmed by the Senate. In addition, there are currently an unprecedented 140 vacancies to the Federal judiciary still to be filled, with more on the way.
By the time President Trump finishes his second term, he will have completely remade the Federal judiciary.
8
Democratic leadership in congress is so weak and ineffective that there is little hope that the Supreme Court will not become another tool of the GOP and corporate extremists for many years to come. Once the GOP tightens its grip on the Court, every conceivable partisan subterfuge to further undermine our democracy and empower the rich will become inevitable. This could be the beginning of a long American Dark Age, a retreat from greatness.
2
I don't understand where the word "fight" has a place in the confirmation process. Opposing Left and Right minorities will extol positions to their respective base. Email/calls campaigns will be organized, protests held, articles/opinions written and aired. None of it will really matter except as a rallying point for elections - the real purpose of all this drama. As a moderate voter who is more interested smart, ethical leaders who focus on solving problems, I only hope that the Democratic Party eventually wakes up to the fact that screaming to your base doesn't win elections. Trump and the fringe Right do that too, obviously, but they also convinced just enough voters that Trump can improve practical issues like jobs and taxes.
3
This fight for the next justice isn't just about reproductive freedom.
It's about the power of corporate interests over ordinary Americans, income inequality, the preservation of voting rights, healthcare for all and protecting the social safety net.
If Kavanaugh is confirmed, the Supreme Court will not reflect the majority of the electorate and there will be political fallout for the GOP, especially since Mitch McConnell took it upon himself to steal the nomination that was President Obama's to make.
4
I'm not sure why we need to spend millions of dollars and weeks of hearings for this confirmation. It's an exercise in futility. The Republicans hold a majority in the Senate and several moderate Democrats will not oppose the confirmation. Thanks to Harry Reid a simple majority is all that is required. So it's a done deal. All the battles and spent monies are unnecessary.
8
The simple truth is that anyone nominated by President Trump will be confirmed by the GOP majority in the Senate. Trump's pick of Kavanaugh - a clearly qualified nominee, if one with a far right bias - is calculated to energize his base and put maximum pressure on Red State Democrats trying to keep their Senate seats. The GOP wants a fight over this SCOTUS nominee because one will greatly assist the GOP to keep control of the Congress
The GOP has won control of the Court for a generation and there is nothing the Democrats can do to change that. Democrats would do well to concentrate on winning back Congress - something that will be impossible if they take the GOP bait and enter into the loosing battle over a Supreme Court nominee.
5
The liberal groups should not waste their time and money on this confirmation process. It's a done deal, with the stranglehold McConnell has on the Senate. Their money is better spent on the upcoming midterms and figuring out a way to make McConnell the Senate Minority Leader!
6
Every fight is the real fight.
1
I don't know what the point of this is. This battle is already lost. Republicans hold a majority, and can do what they want just by ignoring everyone and voting, like they always do; that's it. Protesting their decisions will do exactly as much good as did complaints regarding Merrick Garland's plight.
The reason Collins and Murkowski sank the ACA repeal attempt is because their own constituents couldn't afford to lose its protections - those voters have no such reservations concerning Kavanaugh's confirmation. Also, in the astronomically unlikely event Kavanaugh is not confirmed, we'd just wind up with another candidate with exactly the same credentials, and have to spend millions fighting them on the same useless terms. But that won't happen, because Kavanaugh will be confirmed.
Also, I have no idea what Stolberg and Martin are talking about here:
"That strategy appears to be working. On Monday, Senator Bob Casey, Democrat of Pennsylvania, joined a growing list of Democrats who said they will not vote for any nominee on Mr. Trump’s list."
What do you mean, "that strategy appears to be working"? Bob Casey is a Democrat. They're supposed to be against abortion banning - not people you have to strategize about winning over. This is the other half of the issue - Democrats are fragmented to the point of utter uselessness.
1
I was never a huge Hillary fan, but being a Democrat I voted for her. A question for all you highly principled Bernie Sanders supporters: Are you happy you wasted your vote and Trump won?
3
Did you notice Brett Kavanaugh’s nonverbals with regard to his wife, during the presentation last night?
The family steps onto the platform. Brett Kavanaugh puts his arms on the shoulders of the two daughters as his wife (Ashley) is the last to step up. (Why was she placed last?) She looks down, sees his arm around the elder girl, and moves closer so her husband can put that arm around her (Ashley). Brett tightens his arm around his daughter, and Ashley looks uncomfortable for just an instant, then realizes cameras are on all of them, and assumes a plastic smile.
Then, as they’re leaving, Ashley tries to hold Brett’s hand -- but he moves his hand away and again reaches for the elder daughter's shoulder.
Those calculated moves spoke volumes about Brett Kavanaugh’s character.
Whatever their problem (perhaps it's chronic, perhaps recent; maybe Ashley wanted Brett to decline the nomination), Ashley Kavanaugh didn't deserve that nonverbal rejection.
The best gift a father can give his children is to truly love their mother, and to demonstrate that.
Also, when someone shows you their true self, believe them the first time.
4
I too, noticed what seemed to be an iciness between the husband and wife. She dressed all in black, no jewelry, etc. She did not seem very pleased her husband has been given this honor. I thought to myself, this does not seem to be a happy couple.
1
What did Democrats expect when some of them voted for third party candidates instead of Hillary or Gore? They got Bush in 2000 and Trump in 2016 (and their picks for the Supreme Court. ) This can be fixed, but it will take time, money and voting. If Republicans can hold their noses and vote for Trump to achieve their goal of a far right Supreme Court, Democrats are going to have (and should have done so for Hillary) to do likewise.
9
If the Democratic National committee had not illegally rigged the system against Bernie Sanders nobody would have to hold their nose voting for Hillary because our candidate would have been Bernie. And today he would be addressed as President Sanders because he would have crushed Trump, no question.
4
These groups pro/con on the nomination are throwing their money away. There needs to be:
1. Mandatory retirement at age 70 or 75
2. 20 years maximum on the bench
1
Let the right one take the seat and there is no need for battles or cry. The Master soul is watching and only the right thing will happen for our great country.
Majority of women do not want the freedom of choice. They want men decide what is good for them. The proof for this Is that conservatives are gaining ground over the past decades despite all the noise made by liberals and few loud mouth urban ‘MeToo’ generation. There are women senators from both parties and if they ALL really believe that women can think for themselves, this nomination for Supreme Court would be dead on arrival. It is women who is holding back women and not men.
Republicans have a majority in the Senate, and Democrats' hopes of changing that rest partially on Democratic senators from some conservative states retaining their seats. And yet I, inveterate lefty that I am, get several emails and mailings daily declaring that WE MUST prevent one thing or another, after which the thing goes through because of the aforementioned circumstances. I'm sure these people quite sincerely believe in their positions, but I don't have some kind of moral duty to provide them with a revenue stream.
1
I don't understand why they keep digging. I assume it's because (a) their left wing is forcing them to behave in this unpopular fashion and (b) old habits die hard. They are still using old political tactics in a completely new game against a very different adversary, Trump, who can easily beat them because they are so predictable.
6
There is nothing in the constitution that mandates a nine member SCOTUS. It could be less or more. The Democrats can win a majority in the Senate, control the House with a Democrat in the Oval Office and then increase the SCOTUS to 11 members. The Republicans in the minority would not be able to do anything and neither could the SCOTUS. It's been done before in the past and it could be done again. But the Democrats would need to have a spine to fight back the injustice that has been perpetrated against them regarding the SCOTUS. It's time to wage a nuclear war with the GOP.
3
Well said and new information for me. thx
1
44 thousand motor vehicle deaths a year. Translated to over 700 deaths, at least, since 911.
Not much t say here. Since Trump took over the Dems lost big time from every angle. That is really the issue.
1
First question to ask at the Confirmation Hearings: " What are the ethics and Constitutional implications of a stolen SC Seat ??? ".
Squirm away on that one, Sir. Seriously.
3
Dear Phyliss Dalmatian,
Answer: That's hard ball politics.
Let's face it politics has always been a rough sport and there really aren't many rules.
1
Any money spent by the liberal groups in Maine trying to affect the vote of Sen. Collins will be a waste of money. Not only is she basically untouchable from a reelection point of view (she won in 2014 with 68% of the votes), but also Mainiacs look askance on anyone "from away" who tries to tell them how to think or what to do, if not actively doing the exact opposite thing.
5
I think we’re at a fork in the road. One path would have us abide by the rules, and work within them to achieve the social justice we seek.
But this is a non-starter. The rules were devised by white males who owned slaves, and who actively worked against women and the poor when setting up these rules. At every stop they put obstacles in the path of the people, whether it be the establishment of the Senate and the electoral college, or the 1st, 2nd, and 10th amendments to name only 3.
In other words, our founders knew exactly what they were doing. Hence the stability of this Republic, which has been stable in one regard, in its disregard for the poor, for the working classes, for migrants, for minorities, and for oppressed people across the global south.
To get what we want by playing by their rules is to play a rigged game. So while I still agree with Impeachment, court packing, and constitutional amendments to term limit judges and reign in the 1st, 2nd, and 10th amendments, I also think we need to think about the other fork, the non-rigged one.
And what does this look like? I think it looks like ignoring the rules. It looks like sanctuary cities, an Underground Railroad to help migrants, providing late term abortions as needed through non-licensed providers. In some cases it will mean peacefully disobeying the police and ICE, not paying our taxes, and voter fraud.
But don’t let anyone tell you this is immoral. The only morality is progress and social justice!
The decision to report on the money that may be spent on this battle carries with it the implication that there is a point at which the causes driving people to fight will not be worth the money they will have spent. That is not the case for the groups fighting to stop the confirmation of a judge of this kind, at this precise time, by this president, to the Supreme Court of the land. Let's not talk about money. Let's talk about what is at stake.
3
I find this discussion so strange. A generally conservative justice is to be replaced by another generally conservative justice. Perhaps the court will move to the right, but how far really will it move? We don't know. The real war is the case of replacing Justice Scalia by President Obama (which, as we all know, didn't happen), the possible replacement of Justices Ginsberg or Breyer by President Trump or the replacement of one of the current conservative Justices by the next Democratic President. The current "battle" is less consequential than those extreme ideological changes. As with Justice Scalia, lifespans are unpredictable. Let us not exaggerate this case, because we might need these adjectives later. Just imagine if we will need to discuss the replacement of Justice Ginsberg by Judge Amy Coney Barrett. That will be the Apocalypse in which we might expect to see at least three of the four horsemen.
4
In addition to health care access and reproductive rights, Democrats and others concerned about Kavanaugh's nomination should list as a major reason for their opposition his writings that the president should be exempt from prosecutions and investigations while in office, ostensibly so he is not distracted while in office.
My understanding is that recent polls demonstrate that the significant majority of Americans do not believe that the/any president should be above the law. It is a straight forward and core American concept and hard to defend the opposing position.
4
Collins has already made statements that sound like she's going to support the nominee. I think this battle is almost over and the Democrats lost. They need to concentrate on winning as many elections as possible between now and 2021.
Kavanaugh is never going to make a ruling against a big corporation in the next 30+ years. The only way to counteract these pro-corporate justices is to create a constitutional amendment to publicly fund elections. We have to end Citizens United.
19
The SCOTUS handed down the Dred Scott decision in 1857 and the Civil War began only a few years later. If a Supreme Court takes away personal liberties, like a woman's control over body or the freedom of gay and transgender people to lead the lives they want to lead, it is then acting against the Constitution and not upholding its Constitutional mandate. "Strict constructionism" is just a made up phrase meant to support conservative agendas. How a conservative court may affect Americans' rights and freedoms remains to be seen. The Supreme court can be marginalized and made insignificant by an "effective" elected Congress by the laws that the legislature enacts. The will of the "People" cannot be thwarted, regardless of who sits on the court.
26
I have heard liberals argue that the Second Amendment should only apply to flintlock muskets as existed in 1788. That certainly sounds like "strict construction" to me.
1
RLW--This may be the beginning of a new Civil War. Many of us feel strongly enough to fight for what's right, even to the death, like so many patriots of the past. I hope there won;t be blood in the streets, but it very well could come to that. Just remember, the Republicans have most of the guns.
1
But wait, who are “the People?”
Because there are a lot of people in particular states who would like more restrictions on abortion, to protect the unborn. And there are majorities of people in ND, IN, FL, WV, and MO who want their Democratic Senators to approve Trump’s pick.
The Constitution and 10th amendments are pretty clear on People Power. Whatever isn’t enumerated as a Federal power, is reserved for the people to obtain through their states. And those states’ Senators are the lever they use to protect their rights, through that body’s ability to vet and confirm Judicial branch appointments.
Assuming that the wants of the “People” are always going to be in line with what we progressives want - be it for unrestricted late term abortion, open borders, or gay marriage - seems to assume a French Revolutionary approach to the Rights of Man; that such rights are universal and can be discerned by a sufficiently enlightened board of specialists.
But this is at direct cross purposes with the cultural traditions and rules of law that this country was founded on.
I’m personally all for overthrowing Senate rules, using the powers of the bureaucracy to overthrow Trump, of doing away with the 1st Amendment when speech hurts someone, and overthrowing the 2nd and 10th amendments as well. And I’m all for the selective enforcement of many laws, and regulations, and relaxing private property protections.
But I’m clear on this. Assuming “the people” want what we do seems off.
WE THE PEOPLE cannot leave OUR future to organizations or law makers. WE must take the initiative and DEMAND that organizations and lawmakers who get their money from US - average hard-working tax payers, consumers and retirement investors - preserve/restore true democracy in OUR United States of America.
NOW is the time for like-minded organizations to work together to end this attack on OUR human/civil rights.
NOW is the time to pass the Equal Rights Amendment to OUR U.S. Constitution so no state or other governmental body can suppress a woman's right to choose what she does with her own body.
NOW is the time for environmental groups to work together to motivate their members to STOP the Robber Barons who have gotten control of OUR resources and government/agencies and want to destroy them.
NOW is the time for Socially Conscious legal groups to get together and draft legislation that protects human/civil rights, regulates BIG business - especially "markets" - taxes BIG business and ultra-wealthy stolen/inherited wealth individuals/families, regulates the internet to protect individual privacy and preserves America's Affordable Health Care Act.
Get the new laws ready for the lawmakers WE will put in office this November and in 2020 so they can pass them immediately to save OUR democratic form of government.
51
Fascinating. National Referendum to legalize prostitution.
Remember the good old days, back when, say Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed?
Even though everyone knew she was a liberal, the attitude was "Well, she's certainly qualified, let's overwhelmingly confirm her."
Now, if you don't participate in the correct "group think" dejuour...DEATH!
68
bayboat--That's "du jour," if you'd like to be right, once in a while.
I remember Bork
I am hopeful that the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee read every word of every article and decision that Mr. Kavanaugh has written.He has a long, long paper trail and it must be examined minutely, even if it takes several months.
Out of his million pages, the Democrats have to find the one gotcha page.
How pathetic.
19
We lose this one. We win long term with set goals that reflect support for broad America: healthcare, environment, business, international trade and exchange, workers rights, and obvious equality for sexes races, religious affiliation. Equality, a level playing field, rich folks paying the same percentage of taxes that Was Mart workers do.
14
Looking forward to the Times reporting on Kavanaugh evidently leaking top-secret anti-Clinton grand jury testimony during the Whitewater investigation.
Or you guys could just get scooped by Twitter. Again.
56
Link?!
Democrats and Progressives need to do three things:
1. Stop whining
2. Don't ever, ever, ever vote for anything Trump wants. Ever
3. Keep repeating the same lines again, and again, and again and again. All the time
4. Get a catchy simple, short phrase (see item #3)
America's attention span is as short as a toothpick. So whatever you say has to be short and very easy to understand
This country is going down the tubes very fast. And this Supreme Court pick just gave it a huge shove.
Like all Empires, the US will eventually fall and become a second rate country.
86
It already is a second or even a third rate country!
1. Never will happen.
2-4. Already happening (see picture).
Repeating lines"over and over" is not policy. If all you can do is yell and chase people out of public places and their homes, you are no better then those you wish to silence.
5
This is bloody silly. The only thing worth mentioning is that any woman who believes that she should be able to legally abort her fetus AND who voted for our current President needs to carefully consider how she will use her votes in the future.
26
The Republicans have focused on Roe v Wade as a cover under which they have been packing the Court with men who are on the side of unlimited secret money pouring into elections.
Roe v. Wade has distracted women in red states---there were abortions for centuries before Roe v. Wade, the only difference since R v W is that abortions were legal and therefore safe. If RvW is overturned, women in red states not only will no longer have safe abortion as one of their options, but are likely to face a criminal investigation in the midst of the tragedy of a miscarriage. But that is what the red states chose.
On the other hand a clear majority of us, red and blue states, can agree that we do not want unlimited secret money manipulating elections and do not want to deny care to families struggling with pre-existing conditions. We actually are on the same side.
By continuing to (use secret money to) hide the broader issues of democracy that are at stake behind the so-called pro-life banner, Republicans have been keeping us divided as they inflict lasting damage (through limiting protections of voting rights and favoring the wealthy over workers) on our democracy and our relationship to each other.
Now 4 Court seats have been taken by Presidents who lost the popular vote, ie against the choice of the majority of voters.
Unfortunately, we have to build even larger majorities.
Vote, vote, vote, vote....
120
There is 100% probability he will be confirmed and seated unless Mueller reveals collusion on a grand scale that even the GOP can’t stomach.
22
The Democrats will bring a knife to a gun fight. Start wining elections or get used to this rightward drift continuing. Hint; socialism as a theme will make things much worse.
9
No president under investigation for serious criminal activity should be allowed to nominate a supreme court justice. Just as trump is not legitimate, neither is his pick. A pox on the GOP, especially a House that has a republican majority only due to radical gerrymandering, not due to a majority of votes. The GOP welcomes more interference by Putin. Traitors!
36
Why is this Gallipoli of a battle taking place? What is the net political gain of the spotlight on this hearing taken during the dog days of August? Is this the equivalent of participation trophies in t-ball games? Dems , make your statements and go spend your energy on the midterms.
8
McConnell poisoned the well. The Supreme Court is just as political as the other two branches of government. Lifetime appointments make no sense and should be eliminated. Supreme Court justices should be elected and forced to run for re-election once in awhile. It would keep them honest.
61
No, Harry Reid poisoned the well. He terminated the filibuster rule to allow Obama federal judge selections to be appointed despite Republican protest. What goes around, comes around. Even for Democrats.
38
Election of judges makes them dependent on constituencies that fund their campaigns. Making SCOTUS elected would play right into the hands of the wealthiest who have rigged the rest of the system.
2
To be fair, it wasn’t Republican protest, it was out-and-out stonewalling. I suppose the nuclear option seemed like a good decision at the time — how do you fight people who don’t play fair? The question is, now that the shoe’s on the other foot, do the Dems have the backbone to get down and dirty? I’m not optimistic.
This is the operative passage from the article: “You’re going to see a lot of money spent on mobilization,” said Ilyse Hogue, who runs Naral Pro-Choice America, an abortion rights group. “We’re focused on making sure this is a constant conversation, through the hearings and the vote.”
Money … not change … is the object driving our political process. Will Naral and other Democratic aligned groups call for New Democratic Party leadership? I doubt it. And without new party leadership we can expect more Republican election victories and more opportunities for Naral to raise and spend money. "Money is the mother’s milk of politics."
7
The day those of us who were watching the nasty nomination war between the Democrat party that supported Hillary, and Bernie (and the poisonous atmosphere thus created leading to the disastrous consequences we witnessed in 2016 and still feeling the pain of ) feared has arrived! A conservative (emphasis: conservative) male dominated Supreme court is about to be put in place that will likely oversee the outlawing of abortion and affirmative action! On one clip featuring protesters last night on a cable news network, I caught a glimpse of Bernie Sanders! Could not help resentment welling up at that moment! Oh well, it must be comforting to anti-Hillary Bernistas, and portions of certain minority groups who thought it best sit out the 2016 elections, at least big bad Hillary is not in the White House! All is well!
9
Bernie and his supporters are not the villains here. If you're in the great state of Wisconsin, then you know that Hillary did not step foot in your state during the general election. That mistake, and others (e.g., giving paid speeches to Wall Street right up until she announced...when she and Bill were already rich beyond most people's measure) conributed to the result. She hobbled herself with poor decision making.
79
Hillary was the only candidate on the planet that could lose to Trump.
Where is her glorious voice now that her influence to cash buisness/foundation is stagnant?
4
Yes, Hillary made some poor decisions, but her liabilities clearly paled in comparison to Trump’s. Bernie supporters needed to put on their big-boy pants and pull the lever for Hillary. Anyone who sat out the election out of rancor or spite is complicit in electing this disgrace of a POTUS.
4
The battle should have been waged during the election campaign.
12
Trump, still obsessed with Sessions's recusal as Attorney General from any involvement with the Mueller Investigation, obviously wanted to place a judicial "ringer" on the Supreme Court. In his narcissistic mind and based upon Kavanaugh's previous legal writings, he would be a sure right wing vote against any criminal indictments or subpoenaing of him by the Investigation.
The Fake President could care less of course about the potential shredding of this nominee's professional reputation if he does not commit to a recusal if confirmed, something that Democrats must absolutely insist that Kavanaugh do.
8
The makeup of the court reflects in reverse how the population voted for Trump and Clinton. It is a great schism, one that takes a real leader with charisma and brains to heal. Trump is not that leader, and this court will further entrench the schism.
11
The Democratic Leadership has failed miserably. Misery is what we are going to get for decades from this SCOTUS. Republicans played unfair and did whatever it took to shove their agenda down this country's throat.
In the meantime, the only things Dems Leadership worried about were defending illegal immigrants, LBQTs, and how the government was going to give all free stuff.
The Republicans campaigned on and are running the current government on everything that goes against the principles of the US Constitution and still the Democratic Leadership can't figure out a way to win!!
We need ruthless, hard charging, and unapologetic leadership in the Democratic Leadership!!! We will never win by being nice to the enemy (Republicans).
16
It’s interesting that the photo caption says that the picture shows a man yelling. It looks more like he is the recipient of their yelling, and is throwing his hands up in exasperation. The choice of wording demonstrates the bias of the newspaper.
11
Democrats and other leftists should continue their unhinged behavior as they attempt to destroy a decent man and a solid SCOTUS nominee.
The entire nation needs to reach the conclusion that Dems are completely unfit for governance at this time and need to be kept as far away from political power as possible.
18
What comes to my mind when reading your comment is two words - Merrick Garland. None of this would be happening if this equally fine juror were currently sitting on the Supreme Court in his rightful, constitutional seat.
Unhinged behavior? Two words: Merrick Garland
2
I have to ask, what you accuse Donald Trump of "unhinged behavior"?
1
The Democrats in leadership will wring their cowardly hands , give a wink to their donors and keep leading with their values.
If you want this nomination stopped don't count of these bought off Corporate Democrats.
General strikes until the economy grinds to a halt.
9
The danger inherent in the fight over the court seems to be largely unnoticed by much of America. The Supreme Court is meant to be an independent judiciary, not a vassal of the legislative and executive branches. An independent judiciary is a pillar of free and open democracy and making it partisan is a greater threat to freedom than most Americans seem to realize.
6
The justices themselves want to keep this branch independent. It's the MSM and the political parties that are creating the ideological struggle.
Unfortunately for the left the independence of the Judicial branch relies on the founding fathers intent when the constitution was written. This intent does not allow for the "stretching" of those words which the left relies on.
7
they made it partisan ever since the court hand picked the winner of the 2000 presidential election, specifically people appointed by the candidates father and father's boss who should have recused themselves did this. isn't it a conflict of interest to pick the son of the guy who got you the job to be president of the US?
4
We look too much to the courts to decide and make laws law, instead of looking to the legislators.
A case in point: read the Roe v. Wade decision. The Supreme Court said that Congress could pass a law determining when life begins. Absent any law like this the court had to step in and make a decision. If Congress would pass a law that said life begins and conception or when a heartbeat is detected the Roe v. Wade would become moot.
4
The judiciary does make laws law. This statement belies the conflict on the left.
The legislative branch makes laws.
The judiciary rules on their constitutionality.
Making laws law is what happens when you apply those laws where they we never meant to be applied or when they are are applied unequally.
3
congressmen are cowards who won't make this law. they should but they won't. congress doesn't make law anymore
2
This isn’t the real fight.
The real fight will happen if/when Trump gets to replace a liberal judge with a conservative judge.
In fact if that happens when the Senate is majority Democrat, the seat may be open for years.
2
What battle can be had, really? If the votes are there, they are there.
5
"History, precedent, and the constitution...." This is the mission statement of Kavanaugh and the Federalist Society. My questions are, "whose history, what precedent and is it truly possibly be neutral while interpreting the constitution?"
Let's be clear, it is white people's history, precedent and their interpretation of the constitution. Soon Trump will have two more white men on the supreme court, ruling in favor of the ruling classes interests.
2
Like Clarence Thomas?
It's clear now why Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh has said in the past that U.S. Presidents can not be impeached or prosecuted, that they are "above the law". Apparently, he puts presidents in some category that approaches saints of a sort...How utterly absurd.
For Kavanaugh to make such a statement should immediately disqualify him from consideration. In American jurisprudence, no one is above the law. That precedent was clearly established when Richard Millhouse Nixon (another Republican) was impeached over the Watergate affair.
Again, in the USA, no one individual is above the law. The law reigns supreme. And with a creature like Donald Trump occupying the Oval Office -- due largely to Russia's interference into our election process -- thank God our founding fathers had the vision to make that point crystal clear.
12
Nixon was not impeached.
6
Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton are the only two presidents to have been successfully impeached...
1
It is amazing that your comment has been published. Where did you ever see that Kavanaugh said that the US President cannot be impeached. What you are saying is ridiculous on its face as impeachment is in the constitution. Charitably I could say you are confused by the difference between prosecution and impeachment. And BTW, it was Bill Clinton, not Richard Nixon who was impeached.
2
President Trump and the Republican Congress should amend the Judiciary Act of 1869, expand the court to 15 and appoint six more judges.
Before we are done, and power switches back and forth in our two party system, we will have a Supreme Court with 435 justices, as many as we have congressmen, and just as dysfunctional !
This is the best candidate that they Dems can hope for. Instead of all this fury being wasted on a hopeless endeavor to block a relatively center-right choice for SCOTUS, perhaps they should come up with a message for the upcoming elections better than "A Better Deal"?
Win elections and you get your pick next time.
9
We won by 3 million votes. And we would have won the electoral college without russia helping the opposing side.
2
Shouldah, couldah, wouldah.....we lost, they won, too many of our voters sat on their hands and did not get out to vote. People get the government they deserve. Maybe a lesson for the future. You have to win the Electoral college, the popular vote is just score-keeping.
Trump and Republican leadership is destroying each and every institutions on which American democracy stands. The worst part is, people are losing faith on each and every institution and on democracy as a whole, which is the most successful act by Trump and his lobbyist friends, many of whom are sitting in Wall Street, in Moscow and many other places around the world. After certain time, people would not seek help and/or cooperate with law enforcement and judiciary. They will be more inclined to take laws into their own hands and forced to rely on family connections, one's own tribe (race, religion included) and local mafias (political or corporate or otherwise), as we see in each and every 3rd world countries and/or under autocratic regimes, including Russia, China, India, Egypt, South Africa and many more.
USA is already showing many symptoms of a typical 3rd world country with its growing influence of religion, nepotism, sycophancy and corruption, with consequential increase in socioeconomic inequality, poverty, political instability and decline in its global influence.
18
People lost faith in the equal application of law when Obama sent in his justice department to take over state police departments.
When his justice department failed to arrest gangsters at polling stations.
When he attempted illegal treaties with mass murderers in Iran without the consent of the American people.
When he welcomed the communist dictator and murderer in Cuba.
etc etc etc
6
All true, and all exactly what Trump supporters voted for. The fact they're ignorant of this changes nothing. They are blind to the profound damage Donald Trump is doing to our country and our democracy. They are unreachable now. Spare your breath (or keystrokes).
well said Bonku!
Unless Judge Kavanaugh has some serious skeletons in his closet he will be confirmed. The Democrats may give him a hard time at the confirmation hearing, but they don't have the numbers. The Democratic party must focus on the midterm elections as Congress makes the laws not SCOTUS. The Supreme Courts job is to test the validity of laws in relation to the Constitution. The Democrats need to win the House and intimately the Senate. Congress is where the power is and they need to keep that in focus.
4
Both sides are exaggerating the impact of this appointment.
Even the Times admits this indirectly, with the story and accompanying graph showing the change over time of each SCOTUS justice's ideological bent (see the analysis by U-Michigan professors Martin and Quinn using data gathered by Prof Lee Epstein of WUStL).
This data shows clearly that nearly all justices have moved leftward over time. Except for Thomas, every justice, including Rehnquist and of course Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter, has moved steadily leftward the longer he or she remains on the court.
Of course the Times tries to spin this fact - obvious to anyone with eyes, thanks to the elegant graph - as somehow evidence of the opposite tendency.
Why so? For the same reason that each of our twin ideological zealotries is spinning this as the War of Worlds: it makes money.
Trump and polarization have been berry berry good to The Times and to culture warriors everywhere.
Thanks to Trump, the Times' subscription numbers are soaring.
Thanks to Trump, fringe groups and full-time culture warriors are reaping record donation levels.
And the rest of us - the majority that wants to keep abortion legal but rare and within sensible limits in line with European standards (illegal after 20 weeks), or who'd like a reasonably generous social policy combined with zero tolerance for illegal immigration - the rest of us are tired of apocalyptic warnings and street theater.
Enough of the culture wars, already.
36
You obviously do not have a uterus, T-bone.
The "culture" wars have just begun and Socially Conscious Women and men are going to stop these attacks on OUR human/civil rights.
NOW.
1
True.
But I have a good brain.
And I use it.
Just read where this fight will cost millions of dollars. Wow can anything be done on the hill that doesn't hit the tax payers in there pockets. There goes our bigly tax breaks. The GOP won't so much mind this expenditure to get there guy thru the process, but they sure don't like the cost of the Mueller investigation. Actually they just don't care for the investigation, not interested in the truth or justice. They took a big hit with Nixon. A 2nd time would be devastating. Not a good look!
3
All the money being thrown to this, and all the other political/electoral activities says to me that more than a few people have too much money on their hands. Tax them and spend the money on educating the citizenry, fix the roads, bridges, old gas and electrical systems, subsidize government jobs to accomplish these things, promote international travel and language learning so that we will see the world and its people as part of us. Oh the good that could be done. We are trading that for unfettered capitalism.
12
Absolutely! I just returned from a weekend in the mountains of North Carolina. McMansions everywhere built by people who spend only a few months each year in them. Why a couple with one grown child needs a 4,500 sf house with seven bedrooms and eight baths is beyond me, but by all means, give them a tax cut! Trickle down works, not!
It's a done deal, but it will be entertaining to watch the proceedings.
3
This is a futile and Kamakazi like effort. All it will accomplish will be the further deterioration of Red State Democrats chance of getting re-elected.
Dems would be better off to concentrating on 2020 and nominating a younger candidate who is non polarizing with broader appeal to all voters.
At the turn of the century. William Jennings Bryan had great appeal to Dems. but no appeal to the public at large. The resuli was three Presidential runs, and three losses. The Dems best hope would be for a third-party candidate such as Kasich to divert some GOP votes that would otherwise go to Trump. That's how Woodrow Wilson was elected in 1912.
6
It would seem Kavanaugh has about a 90% chance of being confirmed. So wouldn't the Democrats make better use of their dollars supporting local, state, and federal candidates than opposing this Supreme Court nominee?
The Dems are in a box and the only way out is winning elections at every level of government. Spend your money wisely.
153
Exactly right. During the Obama years, they stopped paying attention to local and state elections, right as the Republicans were building a powerful local and state machine.
4
The Republican dominance of state governments predates even Obama. Karl Rove worked actively to accomplish this and predicted the results we are seeing today. The Republicans were playing the long game -- and they were successful.
1
Follow the money. This nomination wouldn't have happened if the American oligarchs who own the Republican Party hadn't mandated it. Like Trump, they want to invest in China or other markets, and devastate the American labor movement, and they are using social wedges as tools.
That means Roe v. Wade is in great trouble, as is anything that gives health care, food, housing and security to poor people.
The argument will center around other issues, but this is just another brick in the wall, dividing the rich from the poor.
Income inequality is what the Republican Party is all about, though it needs votes so it pretends that it is religious.
As America falls, like Rome, Athens, Berlin, Moscow, London fell, it will be the interests of the super rich that bring us down.
There is no such thing as a good Republican in these times.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
153
Great comment! Thx!
1
The Senate confirmation hearing should be turned into an examination of Judicial Crisis Network, Leonard Leo and the dark money that provides them power.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-jcn-story-how-to-build-a-secretive-rig...
4
Sad, but true. We are no longer a democracy. Oligarchy is alive and well in America. Our system is rigged and it's sad to be fully aware of what's happening and be unable to do anything about it.
What battle? The conservatives have won. And they will continue winning until at least the midterms. A smart journalist I saw on a Sunday show a couple of weeks ago said it best: this fight ended in November 2016. We can thank, in addition to the Russians and James Comey, all the purists who voted for Jill Stein or some other protest candidate. Hillary wasn't someone I was enthusiastic about, but she was all we had.
6
Or we can blame the DNC and Dem leadership for anointing Hillary and then rigging the election for her, thereby turning off wide swathes of voters. Or we can blame the absolutely terrible campaign she ran (Mook should never be allowed to run a campaign again). I mean, my god, she didn’t even step foot in the state of Wisconsin in the general!!
14
The best way if the dems want any chance of defeating this guy is to put ads in conservative states not telling them they will bring back the coat hanger but to tell them they support ACA and first term abortions and this guy will end both and to tell their senators to vote him down and only accept a conservative nominee that will support ACA and first term abortions.
7
That won't work simply because Kabanaugh will tell senators he won't overturn Roe.
1
Thank you for your reply Charles. You are possibly quite right. Kavanaugh will never swear on a stack of bibles that he will not overturn Roe, just a wimpy I'll try not to.
The best way to preserve Roe and ACA, which both are supported in conservative states (with Roe, first term abortions) is to educate the voters there and to have a few senators change their votes.
If all dems, stick together, all they need is one Senator.
There is no real "battle" - the Republicans control the Senate and that's that, the illusion of a battle is for interest groups on both sides to engage in fundraising on a large scale.
Kavanaugh seems like a sure bet to be a reliable supporter of all wings of the Republican coalition - the greediest of the corporate barons, the bigots, and the religious zealots who want to impose their cruel views on everyone.
8
Who needs a special summer reading list when all this drama - for nothing - will be in our face 24 hours a day.
Bring it on, I say.
1
Is the premise of this article that a SCOTUS confirmation can be influenced/determined by money??? How does that work exactly - are congressional decisions the direct result of partisan advertising?
Call me a purist but, Good Grief!
Who could have imagined that...
Let's be clear: Kavanaugh wrote lengthy treatises for Ken Starr about why President Clinton wasn't above the law and could be indicted even by the Justice, then turned around and wrote similar treatises about why President Bush couldn't be indicted because he was the absolute final authority on the Justice Dept.
The only difference, of course, was party affiliation.
This is Trump's bulwark against indictment for his crimes. In ever action the man takes, he acts like someone guilty, who knows he's guilty, and is trying every tactic to avoid being convicted. If it destroys our Constitution, our legal system, our 242 year experiment, what does it matter as long as Trump stays out of jail and in power?
And a power that keeps extending and extending to tyranny, which the founders desperately worked to make impossible. Bret Kavanaugh has already demonstrated that he's all for an imperial Presidency, as long as that person is GOP.
Democrats have really only 2 options left.
1) Convince enough Republicans to stand against Kavanaugh, but risk losing Senate seats in Red states, & the Senate. Despite her words, Susan Collins has only REALLY bucked Trump on the ACA & DeVos. So that's a low odds strategy.
2) Invoke the "nuclear option" & paralyze the already paralyzed Senate until after the election & the next Congress comes to office--if the Dems take back the Senate.
There isn't any other option available. McConnell broke his word already on SCOTUS nominations with Gorsuch.
2
Think back seventeen years ago:. The Gore-Bush election matter was decided precisely according to each Justice's past affiliations; conservatives voted with Bush, liberals with Gore.
Whatever one's political views, we knew than that the system stank. These almost uniformly Harvard and Yale educated judges are little more than automatons, ruling predictable and in virtual lockstep whenever partisan issues are involved.
The judges of the high court are increasingly polarized and incapable of open-mindedness. While many of us would prefer to see more liberals on the Court, the bigger picture is that the Supreme Court, whose members are now almost uniformly bereft of objectivity, is becoming much closer to the nature of our increasingly fanatical citizenry.
87
Generally agree but remember Souter (a Bush I appointee) voted in the minority in Bush v. Gore. Also note many conservative Justices (i.e. appointed by Republican presidents) have drifted leftward (if ever so slightly). That can't be said for liberal Justices who each have remained solidly liberal over their tenure on the Court.
3
Time on the Court should be limited to say 10 years. Members chosen by a non politicized panel if such is possible.
1
Trump’s tweeted statement that Supreme Court nominations are the most important decision a president can make are horrifyingly true.
If confirmed, Kavanaugh, who was chosen over other conservative candidates for his views on presidential indictments , could make the consequences of Trump’s criminal reign linger for decades to come.
8
I wish I understood the confirmation process enough to make sense of the Democrats’ plans to oppose Kavanaugh as vehemently and completely as the public statements, so far, attest. Because if Kavanaugh is successfully blocked, who is next? Eventually Trump will get his nominee, and this one, compared to the others, is less ideological and more likely to be Kennedy-esque. Not to mention that he apparently has a healthy respect for stare decisis. That’s a big deal. The combination of Roberts’ occasional moderation (deliberately, it appears, to avoid more politicization of the Court) and Kavanaugh’s apparently even-keeled judicial temperament would seem to prevent explosive reversals of wrenching course adjustments. It seems here that a lot of the concern stems from Kavanaugh’s devout Catholicism and, weirdly, the very public show of his close family relationship. Am I saying that the Democrats should cut their losses and cave? After a show confirmation hearing, yes.
16
He cannot be blocked.
4
I know I disagree with Kavanaugh on the Consumer Financial Protection Board, EPA climate change efforts and net neutrality. But he might be right on the law involving those issues. Perhaps he will turn out to be the Anthony Kennedy of the 21st century.
8
With conservative advocacy groups in full play and the big money at their command it's not difficult to guess which side the Supreme Court is to favour and reward. The balance of justice will remain tilted to the conservative side for decades now; and instead of being the custodian of the constitution, the Supreme Court will be an enthusiastic champion of the special interest groups.
6
There will be a great mobilization of interests pro and con for the new Supreme Court candidate.I am hopeful that the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee read every word of every article and decision that Mr. Kavanaugh has written.He has a long, long paper trail and it must be examined minutely, even if it takes several months.The electorate deserves the facts and someone has to sit down and digest all of the information.Only if Democrats ask smart, incisive questions will we get an accurate picture of the new justice.
4
If the Democrats regain control of Congress and the Presidency, they should enact legislation expanding the Supreme Court from 9 to 11 members in order to restore the balance there would have been if the Republicans, acting without principle and contrary to precedent, had not refused to vote on President Obama's nominee to replace Justice Scalia.
188
Why stop at 11 in a ruthless pursuit of power? Make it a baker’s dozen or even 15 for good measure.
Great plan. And what's your plan for when the Dems, inevitably, lose control of the Senate and Presidency and those extra seats get filled by Reps, and/or they create even more seats to fill?
Why can't Dems ever think ahead?
1
As someone who has always voted for democrats, you are delusional if you believe that the democrats will win the Congress and Presidency any time soon, especially with the electoral college as it is currently constituted giving red states an advantage. That the democrats could lose to such an unqualified and morally bankrupt person as Trump, only demonstrates that the democratic party should cease to exist and must be resurrected with new leadership and new ideas, starting with bread and butter issues instead of transgender bathrooms.
3
Dems have lost the house, senate, presidency, and now the SC for decades. Dem leadership, you have failed at every level of governance, it is time to purge leadership.
384
I agree. The nomination of Judge Kavanaugh is the culmination of decades of work by the Federalist Society and others. They bring forth highly qualified, ideologically compatible candidates and usher them through the long process to the SC. And the Dems? Do they have an equivalent? Why is it that during most of the Obama years the Dems lost large numbers of State legislatures and State Houses? What happened to the Dems in The National elections in 2010? How was it that at the end of the Obama administration the DNC was broke? Why is it that the Dems lined up behind a Presidential candidate who could lose an election by underwhelming their own base? These are all symptoms of a Party that lacks leadership and rather than acknowledging their blunder, Schumer, Pelosi and, in my Congressional District, Diane DeGette hold on.
Elections do have consequences; this SC nomination is settled business. If Judge Kavanaugh falters, there is a long list of like minded Judges waiting in the wings. The Dems are many, many years away from building such an effective infrastructure. They will never get it done with the current leaders.
8
I've been saying this since the inauguration and angering many of my fellow Democrats. Our leadership is largely weak and complacent. They are not bold. They are not loud enough. Schumer and Pelosi are not compelling leaders. I'm tired of being a member of a losing party. I too want new leadership. We have some congressional stars to draw upon... Kamala Harris is one fine example of a strong, smart, articulate leader.
5
Yes, but please stop with the "abolish ICE" nonsense. That will not win elections. ICE does not make policy. It only implements policies that emanate from the government.
1
I find these headlines so funny. The "battle" over Kavanaugh will be a battle between a hammer and a nail. This battle was fought on November 7, 2016. Conservatives knew the game and the stakes, liberals were completely clueless. This battle is long since over. Goodbye Roe v. Wade, goodbye political restrictions on churches and religious organizations, goodbye restrictions on super PACs. Everything liberals hold dear is going to get absolutely crushed by this court for the next 35-40 years, all because of a bunch of dimwitted liberals.
Thank you, Bernie Sanders.
256
So what, Hilary should've been allowed to run uncontested? I think this was the problem - after she lost to Obama, if leadership was wise, they would've found a way to have a really competitive primary. See the comment by "Very" from "annoyed."
I am grateful that at least the justices, no matter their political inclinations, are at least reasonably educated and smart. I don't think this of the US President.
18
That is what happens when Hillary and the Democratic leadership conspire against other Democratic candidates. It’s amazing that people still don’t get it that that is the reason she lost. You can’t rig primary elections and expect good things to happen afterwards.
24
Hey Mike, don't despair. And Bernie isn't the villian. It's more complicated. It's partly racism, and as we saw with Citizens United, it's partly money. When someone offers YOU millions of dollars for doing something ethically wrong, I hope you have the courage of your convictions. It seems many don't, for some reason...
3
Elections have consequences.
The DNC selected the ONLY individual who could lose to the least-qualified GOP candidate in modern history.
Its time for a wholesale change in Dem Party leadership.
Let the next generation leaders run a national campaign on HC, education and economics - the 3 factors that affect every voter / citizen. Lose the social warrior mindset - it simply will not work in the majority of society.
284
Best comment so far.
4
if elections have consequences why didn't Obama and the democrats get to do anything in the 8 years they had power? They won the house, senate, and white house and yet only had a few months to do anything before republicans cheated and "filibustered" everything. elections have consequences when republicans win, when democrats win nothing happens
1
I have to disagree. The Republicans never attacked Sanders, because didn't believe he would win. They saw the split he was causing among Democratic voters as advantageous. Rest assured if he had he taken the nomination, his Socialism would have become their main point of attack. By the time they were done, they would have had Americans believing him to be to the left of Stalin.
1
A Supreme Court nomination has become a Civil War in and unto itself.
I can think of no more polarizing issue than how the Court will interpret the laws of our nation. In this present case, Judge Kavanaugh's presence on the Court will be felt beyond the century's mid-point. The racial demographics will have doubtless changed. What America will look like then is being driven by what the fraught angst we have now.
Since 2000, when the conservative William Rehnquist Court ruled in favor of Bush in (Bush vs. Gore), the Court has given up all pretense of being an impartial and blind arbiter of all things judicial. We have Citizens United (2010) and McCutcheon (2014), two cases in which the Court blessed corporations and unlimited campaign spending. Recently, we have seen the Court go hard-right for a presidential ban on certain religious groups and immigrants. The prevailing dynamic was not law but ideology.
I cannot foresee a situation in which Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed. It matters not that he and Justice Gorusch will, for all time, be seen as interlopers on the Court, sitting because of an unexampled breach of legislative etiquette in which racial prejudice against a sitting president was the motivating factor.
An (almost) accidental president is now poised to throw a lasting net over our country. Generations unborn will be caught in its grip, for better or worse.
If Congress were not already purchased, perhaps the purity of the process would have been preserved.
192
Agree with much here, but the Gore decision showed the problems with both the left and right Justices of the Court.
More frequently than ever, we know how each will vote before the case is even argued. That is a travesty, for sure.
2
Kavanaugh will be seated on the Supreme Court. Even mean spirited and fear mongering Democrats, liberals and progressives do not have the power to dispute his impeccable credentials. And they do not have the votes to stop his appointment.
30
Mean spirited partisans? Tell that to Merrick Garland.
2
Mean spirited and fear mongering Democrats? I believe you have your parties mixed up.
1
Ugly gloating, "paul of White Plains. You may be right that Judge Kavanaugh will be seated, but do you really think it's "mean spirited" of those who question his nomination to want, for example, to protect rape victims from becoming incubators for the State and having to carry through a forced pregnancy?
1
The Supreme Court justice nomination battle really started before Brett Kavanaugh was selected by President Trump. It was Chuck Schumer who said the Democrats would fight any nominee put forth by the Republicans and he was very serious. The Republicans expected this and were prepared.
Progressive groups such as NARAL and Planned Parenthood may be spending large sums of money but conservatives plan to also. This is a battle in which they have been anticipating for years and they are ready to get started. This is too important for conservatives to take this confirmation hearing lightly.
As a pro life woman, I plan on sending donations to those involved in getting Mr. Kavanaugh elected. We have truth and justice on our side and we will no doubt win. We have been waiting for this opportunity for years and it has finally arrived. This is so exciting for pro lifers and anyone else who cherishes life issues.
19
WPLMMT, As a "pro-life woman" (and who knows if you are a woman because you do not sign your name), why don't you support the lives of all of the little American children that have already been born? You know, the ones that live in poverty? the estimated 16,000,000 children that will go to bed hungry sometime during 2018?
Because as a staunch Republican you do very little to support living and breathing American children at all. Your party has been undermining public education, undermining our environmental and worker safety laws, undermining the effort to bring about a living wage for these children's parents, even undermining the public transportation that they travel on. Your party is now ruling as a gerrymandered, minority party over the majority of us. With the Supreme Court Justices, you hope to keep the legacy of conservative Republican rule long after this country finally manages to overturn Putin's handpicked President. You know, that morally bankrupt man; Donald Trump?
Send all the donations that you want. That just reaffirms your position as part of the corrupt Republican rule. It doesn't make you a good American... Not by a long shot...
3
Cherish life? With all going on now - kids taken from parents, our new anti-breastfeeding stance and more, how are we cherishing life? So hypocritical. To value life you have to support it after birth as well. I have never been more ashamed of our country, and I thought the Bush years were bad.
2
Anyone supporting a regressive group that instead of upholding the ACA law sabotages it every chance they get -- without having a replacement plan, a group that won't fund prenatal care, won't support breast-feeding, won't fund CHIP, continually slashes school lunch and food stamp funding, and locks children up in cages without a plan in place to reunite them with their families cannot claim they are pro-life. Yes, you've a battle of a LIFEtime on your hands.
3
Since Kavanaugh wrote that:
“We should not burden a sitting President with civil suits, criminal investigations, or criminal prosecutions.”
https://www.vox.com/2018/7/9/17551584/brett-kavanaugh-president-criminal...
Democrats on the Judiciary Committee should ask Kavanaugh whether, if a President shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue, he should be immune from criminal prosecution.
329
The simple answer to your question -- he should be impeached, removed from office and then prosecuted.
2
Lynn--Excellent point.
2
Lynn, you don't need to ask Kavanaugh to know how Kavanaugh would respond:
The President, under the Constitution, is always subject to impeachment, after which he will be tried by the Senate and, if found guilty, removed from office. Once he is in this way removed from office, he can be charged criminally for shooting someone on 5th Avenue.
It would happen like this because the President is not above the law, the law in the President's case being impeachment, trial and removal from office.
Maybe you have not thought this through as you should have, or maybe you are not familiar with the Constitution.
Nothing Kavanaugh has said regarding this subject contravenes the Constitution.
2
The GOP started this fight by preventing Obama from filling the vacancy. Given the maneuvering by Trump for Kennedy to voluntarily resign while he is still in office, we must fight this tooth and nail.
It’s been clear for some time that there is no longer room for compromises, as in the past.
It may no longer affect me personally, but this is about our future
216
Will you also send money to help support someone who is forced to bear a pregnancy to full term despite it being a grave risk to her health, or for any of a number of other reasons why a woman should have the right to choose what happens to her own body?
Will you support increased social services funding to support children whose mothers can't afford to raise them? Or to raise children with special needs?
It's easy to have an attitude that any woman should be able to avoid getting pregnant or understand risks if she doesn't. It's something else again to commit to supporting women and their children who are the result of policies that dictate reproductive choices.
If you want to tell others how to live, are you willing to bear the responsibility that goes with that?
1
It actually started in 2004 when the Dems filibustered most of Bush's appointments for the sake of doing so. Some positions remained open for his entire presidency, with the vacancies having opened during Clinton's administration. Do you remember the Gang of 14 to prevent a rule change?
But you were cool with that because it was your guy doing it, right?
7
You are kidding yourself if you honestly think that this supreme court appointment will not affect you personally.
Sooner or later, it will.
What is there to battle over? Kavanaugh appears to be a highly qualified judge. If congressional "advise and consent" is what is called for in the constitution, then that is what should be given. Democrats should not stoop to McConnell's procedural distortions to block this candidate.
The battle will come if Trump is indicted, convicted and we have two sitting SC justices nominated by an illegitimate President. Are Gorsuch and Kavanaugh then impeached from the court? Is the court expanded to 11 with two picks by a Democrat to restore balance?
That is when things will get interesting.
68
The Supreme Court does not act in cases of impeachment.
1
Make that four sitting SC judges nominated by an illegitimate president: add Roberts and Alito, nominated by illegitimate president G.W. Bush.
A good reason not to stoop to McConnell's procedural distortions to block this candidate? Oh I get it - One set of rules for Republicans and another for Democrats.
1
It's time for a major constitutional overhaul for the United States. For a branch of government that is supposed to be independent of politics, it really makes no sense to put its institution in the hands of the political branch. If you want separate judiciary, have the judges be appointed by a Constitution Panel. The judges cannot be appointed if they have left or right political beliefs.
71
Good luck finding those...
Thank you to what was formerly known as the democratic party for trying to force an unelectable Hillary Clinton upon the voters.
Well before she even announced her candidacy the reports were flying about the lack of enthusiasm for her. It was noted that the problem was particularly acute in young voters.
This has been brewing since the democratic party sold its very soul to Fraud Street. Running the second most despised candidate in history against the most despised was a horrible idea. A lot of people voted with their middle finger.
All because of a bunch of dimwitted fence sitters that could not see that this was an election about CHANGE.
Thank you, Hillarybots.
Everyone has a left or right political belief. It would be all but impossible to find judges with no political bent. Then you have the problem of finding an entire panel of constitutional scholars with zero ideology.
A better solution would be to end the nonsensical lifetime appointment. 18 years is being floated. Works for me.
The Democratic Party is a rudderless ship powered by identity politics and wishful thinking. November is coming.
Trump nominated Kavanaugh because Kavanaugh is the one candidate who might protect Trump against the multiple investigations that are underway.
As a side benefit there’s a good chance that Kavanaugh will support making abortion illegal and wrecking health care for tens of millions of people.
149
How would he do that as a SCOTUS Justice when current law clearly states impeachment of a sitting President is possible? Kavanaugh even wrote that Congress has to make the law change.
1
You hit the nail. This sums it up nicely.
1
In doing so he just be writing the epitaph for the Republican party. To have these issues rubbed in the face of the American public for decades and stand by while women are found guilty and who knows what kind of sentence they would receive sends a shock through the system and every corner of life in America. I object to a set of laws that only applies to one sex. Then of course there is a whole universe of issues that will in all likelihood rub people the wrong way.
What a sad state of affairs we find ourselves in today. Much of what divides us now seems to find significant roots in a Congress that refuses to legislate in a bipartisan manner. This dysfunction is not new. For more than 30 years, members of Congress have relied far too heavily on nonelected judges to make the rules, rather than take a stand and risk losing their seats. While politically progressive, I have deep concerns about judicial activism, which exists on both sides of the spectrum. Justice Scalia's votes were as predictable as Justice Brennan's. Additionally, the cowardice of McConnell in denying Merrick Garland a hearing and a vote has done more to damage the Senate and delegitimize SCOTUS than anything I can recall. McConnell just seems so much more evil than most. He has reaped what he has sowed, and one can hardly blame the other side for wanting their pound of flesh. Sad.
188
Obama could have made a recess appointment for Garland, that he did not proves he was never a liberal. Another example of what a con artist he was.
1
Where and how does Harry Reid factor into your assessment of this sad state of affairs? He was the one who opened the door on the "nuclear option" in the Senate.
How does the Left's attacks on nominee Bork factor into your assessment of this sad state of affairs?
Wasn't it BHO what said; "elections have consequences" and "we'll bring a gun to a knife fight"?
Don't pretend that this is a one-sided "sad state of affairs".
I can't see this as such a massive move to the right; the court was already rightward leaning in all its decision making, and Kavanagh was who Kennedy saw as his clone. So what will really change?
This battle was lost when, conforming to Grover Norqist's dictum that even if Democrats win we will not let them govern, McConnell was permitted to nix Merrick Garland's appointment all by himself, without the advise and consent of the Senate.
That was the end. Nothing else will matter re the Court from now on. We will have lesser minds and people without empathy issuing the majority opinions.
124
Please. Kennedy sided with left about as often as the Cubs winning the World Series. Nothing will change.
We will have judges adhering to the Constitution. Not their feelings. This is why I voted for Trump. We do not need judges basing their rulings on empathy, the sign of a weak mind when it comes to upholdng the Constitution.
No, this issue was caused by Harry Reid, democrat.
Why are we tiptoeing over the record of this man while in the George W. Bush White House? At Brett Kavanaugh's 2006 confirmation hearing for the D.C. Circuit, senators Schumer, Durbin, Leahy, and Kennedy went over and over the issues of indefinite detention and detention of combatants, torture, and warrantless surveillance. They got almost nothing out of Kavanaugh, who at one point pointedly told Dick Durbin that he had never been in White House discussions on any of these issues and specifically on detainees.
Within less than a year, the Washington Post published a series called "The Angler" about Dick Cheney, which contains a description of David Addington browbeating the White House Counsel's office in favor of not giving detainees any rights on grounds that they would be easier to interrogate -- in other words, the whole illegal detainee program ball of wax. Kavanaugh is cited as telling Addington that Justice Kennedy would never uphold such a policy -- meaning he had been in such meetings and hadn't been forthcoming about his involvement (Tim Flanagan, arguably Kavanaugh's boss, directly collaborated with John Yoo and Jay Bybee on the torture memoes).
The issue of family separations at the border and migrant "detainee" issues are a direct throwback to that Cheney thinking, including torture, and that Kavanaugh has opined on denying abortion to pregnant migrants on behalf of Scott Lloyd at ORR, it's a very pertinent topic.
We deserve to hear the whole story.
29
He should then be impeached, and subsequently indicted. The constitution covers this.
2
The Democrats' plan to spend millions of dollars on a futile campaign that has zero likelihood of blocking Kavanaugh's confirmation is the kind of thinking that got us where we are today.
Saddling Democratic candidates with futile, vote-costing stratagems won't win back the Senate or the House. It will lose seats.
Publicly embarrassing Kavanaugh won't engender his support in consequential cases the Democrats anticipate will come before the Court. It will alienate him.
It's why contributing to the party and supporting its geriatric leadership is tantamount to voting Republican.
16
I agree that "mobilization" now is two years too late -- Democrats should have mobilized in 2016 and gotten the base to go to the polls and vote. But it's still not too late to put pressure on Murkowski and Collins.
Also, sufficient mobilization now could swing the Senate to the Democrats in November, making it impossible for Trump to nominate other conservative justices if a liberal justice dies or retires.
Finally, if the Democrats can win Congress and the Presidency in 2020, which is not unlikely, we can enlarge the Supreme Court to 11 Justices, which does not require a Constitutional Amendment but is an ordinary law. One of those justices should be Merrick Garland, to undo the robbery of his seat by the Republicans.
2
Don R: I ask you if you are married or have daughters or sisters, or, heck, a mother? Now, if you answer yes to any of the above and love them, I am sure - or rather I hope - you not only want the best for them but also respect and honor their individuality, their equality, their rights to neither have church nor state control them just for being women.
So we will be spending thousands to "get our way." I say it is money well spent. It will never match, however, the millions already thrown out by those conservative and affluent individuals and groups who have been awaiting this very day.
Maybe we will lose seats as you no doubt desire, sir. But keep in mind that will not stop us from fighting for what is ours not only during the next few months but also in perpetuity until all peoples - Black, Brown, White, gay or straight, immigrant or refugee, Muslim, women and kids, are treated equally.
5
if expanding the number of justices from 9 to 11 was all that easy and desirable, why dont the Republicans just do it now and fill the court with Federalists.
3