Trump nominates Brett Kavanaugh for Supreme Court

Why? My guess is two reasons.

1: He helped to try to impeach Bill Clinton despite

2: Supporting the idea that the President should be immune to investigations while in office

So I guess there is a third reason, he is a hypocrite too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/top-supreme-court-prospect-has-argued-presidents-should-not-be-distracted-by-investigations-and-lawsuits/2018/06/29/2dd9c1cc-7baa-11e8-80be-6d32e182a3bc_story.html?utm_term=.e445d0d94c0d

A really good pick! I look forward to seeing Kavanaugh enter the SCOTUS and ruin all the progress we made throughout the years!

He's on record stating he will uphold the law and constitution even when he disagrees with it, that makes him better then at least half the judges in the US right now given how many treat their position as a means to legislate from the bench and how much of a systemic problem of judicial overreach the US has had for years.

Oh well, two down, two more to go.

Zontar:
He's on record stating he will uphold the law and constitution even when he disagrees with it, that makes him better then at least half the judges in the US right now given how many treat their position as a means to legislate from the bench and how much of a systemic problem of judicial overreach the US has had for years.

Oh well, two down, two more to go.

Hopefully he does a decent job.

Honestly he doesn't seems like a particularly bad fit, although it's laughable for adult to really believe that they can separate there political view from there judgement. It could have been far worse (there's rumor that Kennedy actually negotiated for him to be appointed in his place).

But that'll never change how the GOP stole a seat for political reason and then changed the rule so the dem couldn't do the same. He claim he's all for continuity, what does he think of the nuclear option that was used to appoint Gorsuch?

Also they both should have to recuse themselves if anything land in front of the supreme court about Mueller investigation of Trump, but obviously won't cause that would mean 4 dem for 3 GOP judge and of course that can't possibly happen.

He picked the one guy that says the President is above the law. No big surprise here.

So the dude wanted to impeach Clinton, thought the pres is above the law under Bush jr...

What was his opinion on Presidential immunity between 2008 and 2016?

altnameJag:
So the dude wanted to impeach Clinton, thought the pres is above the law under Bush jr...

What was his opinion on Presidential immunity between 2008 and 2016?

Unfortuanately, it feels like the elite and most powerful often get away with anything. Bush should be in jail along with Dick Cheney right now, but not only are they living normal lives, they're still sought by the media as experts on foreign policy. It's quite annoying.

Well, Roe v Wade is probably safe now. I can't say the same for Obergefell v Hodges.

The most interesting thing about Kavanaugh is his opinion of presidential immunity, which is...quite broad, really. He believes that sitting presidents should be completely immune to criminal investigation while in office, and that the mechanism for removing a criminal commander-in-chief is and should be impeachment. This is an unsettled matter that is really quite likely to be eventually settled if Mueller decides to subpoena Donald Trump to get him under oath and Trump refuses.

This, almost certainly, is the reason Trump picked Kavanaugh rather than someone more pleasing to his base, like Amy Coney Barrett, who is a Catholic and considered more likely to overturn Roe. Of all the judges on the Federalist Society's well-curated list, Kavanaugh is the only one who believes the president should be above the reach of criminal investigation while in office. It is not a coincidence that he was appointed by a president who happens to be entangled in a criminal investigation while in office.

Kavanaugh's own ideology is remarkably malleable, however. He was really quite zealous in prosecuting Clinton while working in the Starr probe - pushing for Clinton to be asked some very confronting questions, such as "If Ms. Lewinsky were to say that you ejaculated into her mouth in the Oval Office on two occasions, would she be lying?" His words in a memo to Starr are really quite something:

Brett Kavanaugh c. 1998:
"[T]he President has disgraced his Office, the legal system, and the American people by having sex with a 22-year-old intern and turning her life into a shambles - callous and disgusting behavior that has somehow gotten lost in the shuffle. He has committed perjury (at least) in the [Paula] Jones case...He has tried to disgrace [Ken Starr] and this Office with a sustained propaganda campaign that would make Nixon blush."

But, by some strange coincidence, as soon as the Republican lawyer was working in the White House under George Bush, his opinion morphed into stating that the President ought not be bothered by petty things such as "criminal responsibility." Then Bush made him a federal judge, where he apparently served without incident, and now he's going to the Supreme Court largely because of his willingness to loyally follow one party's ever-shifting political principles.

The flip side of that is that he is by-and-large a normal establishment Republican. He's the kind of pick you'd expect from a President Marco Rubio or a President Jeb Bush. He's not a vociferous ideologue, a Trump patsy, or an unqualified idiot who happened to briefly snare Trump's attention. Trump voters should probably be upset with how safe a pick he is, given that Trump was elected with a promise to drain the swamp and all that.

Hmm. Maybe we should stop pretending like he was ever going to actually do that.

Meiam:
But that'll never change how the GOP stole a seat for political reason and then changed the rule so the dem couldn't do the same. He claim he's all for continuity, what does he think of the nuclear option that was used to appoint Gorsuch?

A judge is there to decide the law. Gorsuch was appointed through a procedural loophole which, whilst arguably abusive, is surely legal. Thus no judge in the land could reasonably find against it.

Kavanaugh's most notable opinions include his dissent in the circuit court decision in heller v dc, a dissent in garza v hargan where he tried to stop an undocumented immigrant from getting an abortion, a dissent in Priests for Life v hhs, in a religious liberty challenge to the contraception mandate in the ACA, a dissent in Agri processor v NLRB when he said undocumented immigrants had no rights to collective bargaining, despite SCOTUS ruling back in '84 that undocumented immigrants were employees for the purposes of collective bargaining power, a dissent in upholding a fine against seaworld in the death of that orca trainer, and is a huge proponent of unitary executive theory.

In short, he's a rubber stamp for trump, and is going to rule against workers and abortion rights consistently.

Agema:

Meiam:
But that'll never change how the GOP stole a seat for political reason and then changed the rule so the dem couldn't do the same. He claim he's all for continuity, what does he think of the nuclear option that was used to appoint Gorsuch?

A judge is there to decide the law. Gorsuch was appointed through a procedural loophole which, whilst arguably abusive, is surely legal. Thus no judge in the land could reasonably find against it.

Law are not just made of text, there made of legal precedent. When the loophole used was never used before for this and is specifically used to get around another law, you're both ignoring part of the law and going against precedent. If somebody really think that continuity is an important part of the law, that should be a big problem.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here