Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[Nivek 16,852]

Partisan politics aside, he has the fundamental qualifications, such as they are, for a Supreme Court Justice.

A pulse?

[hobbes2702 12,799]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Partisan politics aside, he has the fundamental qualifications, such as they are, for a Supreme Court Justice.

Until he disqualified himself with his testimony before the senate where he announced that he would use his seat to get back at senators for asking questions

[JohnnyRage 1,617]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Partisan politics aside, he has the fundamental qualifications, such as they are, for a Supreme Court Justice.

White, Yale or Harvard, D.C., ducked divisive opinions?

[TwiceHorn 31,263]

2 minutes ago, Nivek said:

A pulse?

Ivy law school, Supreme Court clerkship, DOJ "service," DC Circuit.

It's a resume functionally identical to Merrick Garland's, for example.  And most of the other justices.

[DDD Dad 14,251]

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Ivy law school, Supreme Court clerkship, DOJ "service," DC Circuit.

It's a resume functionally identical to Merrick Garland's, for example.  And most of the other justices.

You left out date rape.

 

And lots of beer.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,834]

Just now, DDD Dad said:

You left out date rape.

 

And lots of beer.

And I think more people need to be asking: who paid off all of his debts?

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

I'm sure I'm prejudiced against him for all that's been discussed over the last several years, but I get the feeling that he would be one of those HOA presidents that gets along great with a handful of people, but the rest are hoping he steps on a rake.

That's all I got.

[TwiceHorn 31,263]

9 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

You left out date rape.

 

And lots of beer.

Well, true.  But "choice" tends to imply the initial selection.

[Guest Lobo]

7 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

And I think more people need to be asking: who paid off all of his debts?

My guess?  Donkey Dong Doug.

 

[JohnnyRage 1,617]

12 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Ivy law school, Supreme Court clerkship, DOJ "service," DC Circuit.

It's a resume functionally identical to Merrick Garland's, for example.  And most of the other justices.

I forgot, Man.

[GhostOfTomJoad 9,307]

8 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

And I think more people need to be asking: who paid off all of his debts?

Come on, who among us hasn't floated $200K in credit card debt that somehow just magically disappeared?

[TwiceHorn 31,263]

18 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

White, Yale or Harvard, D.C., ducked divisive opinions?

Pretty much.  And he mostly didn't duck them.  Made quite a few, but that's getting into the partisan end of it.

I'm not a fan, but pre-confirmation, he was a pretty standard GOP choice.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,834]

1 minute ago, Lobo said:

My guess?  Donkey Dong Doug.

 

No I didn't

[Js1 85,095]

55 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Whadda you know 

 

He was the FedSoc pick so President Cruz/Rubio/Pence/DeSantis would have picked him. So….

[WhatTheBuck 28,705]

30 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Ivy law school, Supreme Court clerkship, DOJ "service," DC Circuit.

It's a resume functionally identical to Merrick Garland's, for example.  And most of the other justices.

Except Merrick Garland isn’t a lying, crying, whiny little bitch like Kavanaugh. 

[Guest Lobo]

There's rarely an under-qualified SCOTUS nominee in terms of academic pedigree, clerkships, and then either prominent firm placement and/or federal bench experience.  There's never gonna be a nominee from my law school going before the Senate to be confirmed to the highest bench.  Nobody's saying that.  Despite what most of his detractors say, I think Kavanaugh is a very smart justice.  I just don't like who brung him as I disagree with many of his opinion writings.  

[washparkhorn 9,935]

The legal system has held the door - and looks steady.

Knock on wood.

[tx 3 putt 76,314]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Partisan politics aside, he has the fundamental qualifications, such as they are, for a Supreme Court Justice.

 

per the constitution, im as qualified as him ....

The Constitution does not specify qualifications for Justices such as age, education, profession, or native-born citizenship. 

[Bama Chick 28,596]

There's rarely an under-qualified SCOTUS nominee in terms of academic pedigree, clerkships, and then either prominent firm placement and/or federal bench experience.  There's never gonna be a nominee from my law school going before the Senate to be confirmed to the highest bench.  Nobody's saying that.  Despite what most of his detractors say, I think Kavanaugh is a very smart justice.  I just don't like who brung him as I disagree with many of his opinion writings.  

[Js1 85,095]

I was coming to post that! 

[Guest Lobo]

I don't get it.  Miers wasn't well educated?  Is dumb?  Miers was well accomplished with top flight law firms and clerkships?  I don't get it.  

Might be time to stop playing "every potential justice we don't like is stupid according rules we've just made up" and get your big kid pants on, the Judiciary is only going to be the stable voice of reason for another couple years.  Then that's the next ship to burn.  

[StruggleBus 3,922]

15 minutes ago, tx 3 putt said:

 

per the constitution, im as qualified as him ....

The Constitution does not specify qualifications for Justices such as age, education, profession, or native-born citizenship. 

[Bateshorn 9,898]

I have a saying my kids are sick of, but is 100% true: each time you get a bad grade or a test score slips, a potential educational Avenue possibly gets shut off.  It’s not fair, but it’s the way this world works.  And one of the first to go is Supreme Court justice.  
 

I have no desire for my kids to be Supreme Court justices, but a graduate of say UT Law will almost certainly never be a Supreme Court justice. Hell, they’d be lucky as fuck to clerk for a Supreme. Kavanaugh did what he needed to do to stay in the conversation.

Edited July 14, 2021 by Bateshorn

[tx 3 putt 76,314]

4 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I don't get it.  Miers wasn't well educated?  Is dumb?  Miers was well accomplished with top flight law firms and clerkships?  I don't get it.  

Might be time to stop playing "every potential justice we don't like is stupid according rules we've just made up" and get your big kid pants on, the Judiciary is only going to be the stable voice of reason for another couple years.  Then that's the next ship to burn.  

per wiki ........

 

Miers's nomination was criticized by people of various political views for the fact that she had never served as a judge at any level, her perceived lack of intellectual rigor, her close personal ties to Bush, and her lack of a clear record on issues likely to be encountered as a Supreme Court Justice. Many notable conservatives vigorously criticized her nomination, and numerous conservative groups normally considered part of Bush's political base planned to mount an organized opposition campaign.

Miers met with the Senate Judiciary Committee after her nomination and in those meetings she was ill-prepared and uninformed on the law.^[25] Senator Tom Coburn told her privately that she "flunked" and "[was] going to have to say something next time."^[25] Miers had difficulty expressing her views and explaining basic constitutional law concepts.^[26] Miers had no experience in constitutional law and did not have extensive litigation experience; at her Texas law firm, she had been more of a manager.^[27] In addition, Miers had rarely handled appeals and did not understand the complicated constitutional questions senators asked of her.^[27] To White House lawyers, Miers was "less an attorney than a law firm manager and bar association president."^[

[tx 3 putt 76,314]

5 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

I have a saying my kids are sick of, but is 100% true: each time you get a bad grade or a test score slips, a potential educational Avenue possibly gets shut off.  It’s not fair, but it’s the way this world works.  And one of the first to go is Supreme Court justice.  

make sure you knock out at least 100 kegs. also helps cell phone cams weren't around back in the day ......

[Js1 85,095]

19 minutes ago, Lobo said:

I don't get it.  Miers wasn't well educated?  Is dumb?  Miers was well accomplished with top flight law firms and clerkships?  I don't get it.  

Might be time to stop playing "every potential justice we don't like is stupid according rules we've just made up" and get your big kid pants on, the Judiciary is only going to be the stable voice of reason for another couple years.  Then that's the next ship to burn.  

See below your post. Her nomination was an embarrassment. 

Edited July 14, 2021 by Js1

[Guest Lobo]

Yes, I realize it was.  But not because she was poorly educated or didn't clerk and serve with the right judges and firms outta law school.  That was the only point of my post #17601 which was in reference to people wondering about Kavanaugh's background.  Now when it comes to their current judgement state at Senate hearing, lay into them.  REmember the big deal it was that Kagan hadn't served as a judge anywhere prior to her nomination. My point is there aren't as many deal breakers as many would think.  Most of these folks from both sides of the aisle come from the same 7 law schools, clerked for the same 3 circuits, and worked at the same 10 law firms.  Diversity of thought is an illusion but an important one.  We need this institution, now more than ever.  

[jimmyjazz 45,546]

Perhaps we should be talking less about minimal qualifications for SCOTUS, and more about nominal (or even preferred) qualifications.

I mean, I'm "qualified" to be CEO of GE, but it ain't happening, for dozens of good reasons.

"Ivy Law" is a dumb hurdle, by the way.

[Guest Lobo]

I agree, but both parties have tacitly agreed to a pretty narrow view of the background of a good SCOTUS nominee.  Now, on judicial opinion---they vary.  But they all have 1 of the same 7 backgrounds 90% of the time according to ScOTUS watchdog, Brian Fontana.  There's more variance in our Presidents in terms of background (not race or gender obviously).  

[Celery Man 20,882]

39 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Perhaps we should be talking less about minimal qualifications for SCOTUS, and more about nominal (or even preferred) qualifications.

I mean, I'm "qualified" to be CEO of GE, but it ain't happening, for dozens of good reasons.

"Ivy Law" is a dumb hurdle, by the way.

i promise you GE doesn't know what the fuck it is doing

[HornPhD 1,364]

2 hours ago, Lobo said:

I think Kavanaugh is a very smart justice. 

“Very smart” as defined by his upbringing, educational pedigree, and connections. 
 

[MaybeACoordinator 8,349]

BK owes as much to this guy as he does Trump....Imagine having your whole career hinge on a teary-eyed speech from ol' Lindsey Ladybugs....

 

[AnotherUTFan 9,673]

i promise you GE doesn't know what the fuck it is doing

Ill second.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

I didn’t care too much about kavanaugh because I knew he was getting in no matter what, until his bullshit hearing where he acted the complete crying fool and exhibited that he didn’t have the temperament or the demeanor to be on the Supreme Court. It was a complete embarrassment but he got in anyways. Politics. Oh well. 

[JimmyJames 12,271]

17 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

BK owes as much to this guy as he does Trump....Imagine having your whole career hinge on a teary-eyed speech from ol' Lindsey Ladybugs....

 

Kinda sick 

[WhatTheBuck 28,705]

21 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

I didn’t care too much about kavanaugh because I knew he was getting in no matter what, until his bullshit hearing where he acted the complete crying fool and exhibited that he didn’t have the temperament or the demeanor to be on the Supreme Court. It was a complete embarrassment but he got in anyways. Politics. Oh well. 

Yeah, there were at least 20 Federalist Society approved candidates on that list. They could’ve picked someone better qualified than that boozy child. Embarrassment is right. To use Trumpian rhetoric, it’s shameful, it’s a disgrace. 

[TwiceHorn 31,263]

8 hours ago, Lobo said:

Yes, I realize it was.  But not because she was poorly educated or didn't clerk and serve with the right judges and firms outta law school.  That was the only point of my post #17601 which was in reference to people wondering about Kavanaugh's background.  Now when it comes to their current judgement state at Senate hearing, lay into them.  REmember the big deal it was that Kagan hadn't served as a judge anywhere prior to her nomination. My point is there aren't as many deal breakers as many would think.  Most of these folks from both sides of the aisle come from the same 7 law schools, clerked for the same 3 circuits, and worked at the same 10 law firms.  Diversity of thought is an illusion but an important one.  We need this institution, now more than ever.  

Actually, by the de facto standards of modern Justices, her education wasn't sufficiently elite (SMU/SMU), her clerkship (ND Tex) same.  And even her firm at the time was a major regional, but not a big national firm.

While the Supreme Court is not like other judgeships, the closest is a US Court of Appeals and I think that experience should be nearly mandatory.

I would like to see some nominees with less government experience and more private sector, especially criminal defense, or at least litigation against the government.

[TwiceHorn 31,263]

6 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

I didn’t care too much about kavanaugh because I knew he was getting in no matter what, until his bullshit hearing where he acted the complete crying fool and exhibited that he didn’t have the temperament or the demeanor to be on the Supreme Court. It was a complete embarrassment but he got in anyways. Politics. Oh well. 

Yeah he didn't reveal himself to be unfit until his confirmation.  Even Clarence Thomas handled it better than he did.

[Bookman 4,610]

9 hours ago, Lobo said:

I don't get it.  Miers wasn't well educated?  Is dumb?  Miers was well accomplished with top flight law firms and clerkships?  I don't get it.  

Might be time to stop playing "every potential justice we don't like is stupid according rules we've just made up" and get your big kid pants on, the Judiciary is only going to be the stable voice of reason for another couple years.  Then that's the next ship to burn.  

There was nothing about Miers that was special. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,146]

8 hours ago, Lobo said:

Yes, I realize it was.  But not because she was poorly educated or didn't clerk and serve with the right judges and firms outta law school.  That was the only point of my post #17601 which was in reference to people wondering about Kavanaugh's background.  Now when it comes to their current judgement state at Senate hearing, lay into them.  REmember the big deal it was that Kagan hadn't served as a judge anywhere prior to her nomination. My point is there aren't as many deal breakers as many would think.  Most of these folks from both sides of the aisle come from the same 7 law schools, clerked for the same 3 circuits, and worked at the same 10 law firms.  Diversity of thought is an illusion but an important one.  We need this institution, now more than ever.  

That's a lot of words to say "Ok, I was wrong but I will never admit it."

[Mrs Whiggins 13,049]

8 hours ago, HornPhD said:

“Very smart” as defined by his upbringing, educational pedigree, and connections. 
 

Reminds me of the quote from Sinclair Lewis' Dodsworth:

“They were not altogether to blame. They were the products of Prohibition, mass production, and an education dominated by the beliefs that one goes to college to become acquainted with people who will later be useful in business, and that the greatness of a university is in ratio to the number of its students and the number of its athletic victories."

In a nation of 330 million, his future should not have been baked in to the extent it was but it doesn't make him stupid. However, there were most likely a multitude of worthy or worthier candidates who were never going to be on the team much less the bench due to the circumstances surrounding their birth.

 

[Guest Lobo]

1 hour ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

That's a lot of words to say "Ok, I was wrong but I will never admit it."

Yeah, I hereby clearly admit that I was wrong.  I completely spaced on the Meiers nomination because I am stupid.  My Brett comments were merely that this continued, "every justice who doesn't vote in lockstep with my beliefs is a fucking idiot" is ridiculous.  Last I checked, it was 6-3 with Breyer thinking he's gonna live forever.  Obviously there have been bad nominations, bad justices, bad rulings, bad everything.  It's a 250 year old court with 9 people on it, and hundreds more failed nominees.  It's gonna have fuckups.  I made a fuckup.  But my macro point still stands, keep bitching and moaning about how stupid Kavanaugh is, how evil Thomas is, how corrupted Roberts is.  See what happens.  Breyer should have already announced his retirement.  The GOP bench at the federal level is as deep the Alabama offense.  Also, I was wrong about Meirs.  Neg rep me for the rest of the day, I was wrong.  I admit, I was wrong.  

Anyway, Brett is a Supreme Court Justice.  Many of them come from a frighteningly similar background.  On both sides of the aisle/dais.  But this constant "everybody who is not Ginsberg is a fucking moron" is just not serving y'all well.  I am reminded of something Justice Kennedy once said to our law class, "We're not apolitical because of the constitution.  We're apolitical because of the people in politics."  

[Bateshorn 9,898]

3 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, I hereby clearly admit that I was wrong.  I completely spaced on the Meiers nomination because I am stupid.  My Brett comments were merely that this continued, "every justice who doesn't vote in lockstep with my beliefs is a fucking idiot" is ridiculous.  Last I checked, it was 6-3 with Breyer thinking he's gonna live forever.  Obviously there have been bad nominations, bad justices, bad rulings, bad everything.  It's a 250 year old court with 9 people on it, and hundreds more failed nominees.  It's gonna have fuckups.  I made a fuckup.  But my macro point still stands, keep bitching and moaning about how stupid Kavanaugh is, how evil Thomas is, how corrupted Roberts is.  See what happens.  Breyer should have already announced his retirement.  The GOP bench at the federal level is as deep the Alabama offense.  Also, I was wrong about Meirs.  Neg rep me for the rest of the day, I was wrong.  I admit, I was wrong.  

Anyway, Brett is a Supreme Court Justice.  Many of them come from a frighteningly similar background.  On both sides of the aisle/dais.  But this constant "everybody who is not Ginsberg is a fucking moron" is just not serving y'all well.  I am reminded of something Justice Kennedy once said to our law class, "We're not apolitical because of the constitution.  We're apolitical because of the people in politics."  

I tend to agree that sourcing everyone from the same 2 law schools is not healthy for our political system, and sourcing all the lawyers from the insular constitutional law community is incestuous.  
 

 

[wildcat09 29,225]

12 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Ivy law school, Supreme Court clerkship, DOJ "service," DC Circuit.

It's a resume functionally identical to Merrick Garland's, for example.  And most of the other justices.

Ivy law school should automatically disqualify someone from SCOTUS consideration, at least for the next thirty years or so. 

[Js1 85,095]

29 minutes ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, I hereby clearly admit that I was wrong.  I completely spaced on the Meiers nomination because I am stupid.  My Brett comments were merely that this continued, "every justice who doesn't vote in lockstep with my beliefs is a fucking idiot" is ridiculous.  Last I checked, it was 6-3 with Breyer thinking he's gonna live forever.  Obviously there have been bad nominations, bad justices, bad rulings, bad everything.  It's a 250 year old court with 9 people on it, and hundreds more failed nominees.  It's gonna have fuckups.  I made a fuckup.  But my macro point still stands, keep bitching and moaning about how stupid Kavanaugh is, how evil Thomas is, how corrupted Roberts is.  See what happens.  Breyer should have already announced his retirement.  The GOP bench at the federal level is as deep the Alabama offense.  Also, I was wrong about Meirs.  Neg rep me for the rest of the day, I was wrong.  I admit, I was wrong.  

Anyway, Brett is a Supreme Court Justice.  Many of them come from a frighteningly similar background.  On both sides of the aisle/dais.  But this constant "everybody who is not Ginsberg is a fucking moron" is just not serving y'all well.  I am reminded of something Justice Kennedy once said to our law class, "We're not apolitical because of the constitution.  We're apolitical because of the people in politics."  

Ooh I'm so scared.  

[wildcat09 29,225]

I will say this about Kavanuagh: despite his clear lack of an appropriate judicial temperament, despite his explicit vow to seek revenge against Democrats, and despite the fact that he's already shown himself to be a shitty justice simply in terms of the quality of his thought in his written opinions, thanks to his desperate need to be liked by the "respectable" country club crowd, he's not nearly as shitty for America and the world as Sam Alito is.

[Js1 85,095]

3 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I will say this about Kavanuagh: despite his clear lack of an appropriate judicial temperament, despite his explicit vow to seek revenge against Democrats, and despite the fact that he's already shown himself to be a shitty justice simply in terms of the quality of his thought in his written opinions, thanks to his desperate need to be liked by the "respectable" country club crowd, he's not nearly as shitty for America and the world as Sam Alito is.

He also basically just followed Roberts around like a puppy. He shifted a miniscule amount to the left and Roberts shifted a miniscule amount the right to where they were almost on top of each other in the ideological spectrum of the 2020 court.  He and Roberts were in agreement 91% of the time 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/02/us/supreme-court-conservative-voting-rights.html

[hpslugga 4,043]

6 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I will say this about Kavanuagh: despite his clear lack of an appropriate judicial temperament, despite his explicit vow to seek revenge against Democrats, and despite the fact that he's already shown himself to be a shitty justice simply in terms of the quality of his thought in his written opinions, thanks to his desperate need to be liked by the "respectable" country club crowd, he's not nearly as shitty for America and the world as Sam Alito is.

No doubt. Alito is a fucking nut. He's Kavanaugh on a 24/7 hangover without taking his crazy pills.

[David Dennison 18,652]

23 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Ivy law school should automatically disqualify someone from SCOTUS consideration, at least for the next thirty years or so. 

This, this, this. So very much this. 

 

[wildcat09 29,225]

7 minutes ago, Js1 said:

He also basically just followed Roberts around like a puppy. He shifted a miniscule amount to the left and Roberts shifted a miniscule amount the right to where they were almost on top of each other in the ideological spectrum of the 2020 court.  He and Roberts were in agreement 91% of the time 

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/02/us/supreme-court-conservative-voting-rights.html

The conclusion that he basically does what Roberts wants isn't wrong, but using how often someone voted with someone else is just a really bad way to evaluate a justice or the Court overall and I'm going to point that out every time it's done. Not saying you're doing this, but too many people are using this last term and arguments like this to claim that the Court is actually carefully moderating and not veering sharply to the right, and it's nonsense.