# Brett Kavanaugh is the new Supreme Court nominee. Any Thoughts? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [July 10, 2018, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642 "2018-07-10T08:53:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2018, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/41 "2018-07-10T23:21:05Z")
Kavanaugh’s record will be closely studied leading up to the hearings. More will be known about his judicial positions then. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 10, 2018, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/42 "2018-07-10T23:54:12Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Kavanaugh’s record will be closely studied leading up to the hearings. I disagree. Republicans don’t actually care about his record. They would vote for him no matter what kind of job he has done. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/43 "2018-07-11T00:01:55Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > For me, though, it’s significant that his change of mind did not translate into a belief that the constitution should be read to prevent such investigations, but merely that Congress should consider enacting legislation. > > That’s what I want judges to do: render under Congress what is Congress’. What’s your opinion on the Kelo decision? ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/44 "2018-07-11T00:40:46Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Why do some on the right think he is liberal? Huh, really? I suppose there’s all kinds. Perhaps Souter Derangement Syndrome, to borrow a turn of phrase? Feeling so close to really undoing, not just Roe, but everything back to before the New Deal that they can taste it, and all that stands in the way of it happenning NOW!!! is the possibility of someone actually, well, conservative, who may not believe that the answer to judicial activism past is reverse judicial legislation now. Or maybethey can’t forgive him having given Roberts the “out” of calling the individual mandate a tax, or him being in the team that failed to oust Bill Clinton and in so failing ensured there’ll never be a President Newt (many thanks and credit to them for that, at least :D). Or maybe you have run into some types who have redefined right wing ideology as being about Trumpian temperament, by which anyone who is respectably presentable in polite society must be by definition “some kind of liberal”. (I suppose there’s people who want to see someone show up at the hearings and respond to the questions with the legal testimony equivalent of (pace, Arlo) _“Senator… I wanna kill. I mean, kill, I wanna I mean, I wanna see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies.”_) ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/45 "2018-07-11T00:59:25Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Huh, really? I suppose there’s all kinds. Perhaps Souter Derangement Syndrome, to borrow a turn of phrase? Feeling so close to really undoing, not just Roe, but everything back to before the New Deal that they can taste it, and all that stands in the way of it happenning NOW!!! is the possibility of someone actually, well, conservative, who may not believe that the answer to judicial activism past is reverse judicial legislation now. > > Or maybethey can’t forgive him having given Roberts the “out” of calling the individual mandate a tax, or him being in the team that failed to oust Bill Clinton and in so failing ensured there’ll never be a President Newt (many thanks and credit to them for that, at least :D). Or maybe you have run into some types who have redefined right wing ideology as being about Trumpian temperament, by which anyone who is respectably presentable in polite society must be by definition “some kind of liberal”. (I suppose there’s people who want to see someone show up at the hearings and respond to the questions with the legal testimony equivalent of (pace, Arlo) _“Senator… I wanna kill. I mean, kill, I wanna I mean, I wanna see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies.”_) The only thing of substance in there was the supposed liberal opinion that gave Roberts the idea that the ACA could be upheld as a tax. If you read the opinion, Kav did what Roberts should have done if he thought it was a tax and dismissed the suit and decided it later. Kav was careful to note that he suspected that the law could not be ultimately upheld as a valid exercise of interstate commerce, and also not as a tax because the law affirmatively prohibited not having health insurance in a section separate from the taxing section. It was a pretty damned conservative opinion but because the Plaintiffs main complaint was the payment of the penalty, he punted. The dicta was very powerful, almost in line with the dissenters in the SC case. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/46 "2018-07-11T01:08:50Z")
Oh, absolutely. I get the feeling that some of the ultra-righties are now looking at Roberts himself as the New Kennedy, for that. Which overlooks that the SCOTUS does a lot of punting when they can get away with it regardless of the dominant leaning. But if there are hard-righties who think Kavanaugh is not truly conservative, IMO that has as much “substance” to it as my other fanciful musings on what could possibly lead there. I have to conclude they will never find anyone conservative enough. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/47 "2018-07-11T01:27:05Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I disagree. Republicans don’t actually care about his record. They would vote for him no matter what kind of job he has done. This. The endorsement of President PantsOnHead is all the record they need to know. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/48 "2018-07-11T03:46:25Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I disagree. Republicans don’t actually care about his record. They would vote for him no matter what kind of job he has done. > [@ThelmaLou](#): > > This. > > The endorsement of President PantsOnHead is all the record they need to know. And I’m sure that both of you withheld judgment until after the announcement last night, then read through all 300 of Kavanaugh’s opinions and came to a reasoned decision to oppose him. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/49 "2018-07-11T03:51:59Z")
> [@JRDelirious](#): > > Oh, absolutely. I get the feeling that some of the ultra-righties are now looking at Roberts himself as the New Kennedy, for that. Which overlooks that the SCOTUS does a lot of punting when they can get away with it regardless of the dominant leaning. > > But if there are hard-righties who think Kavanaugh is not truly conservative, IMO that has as much “substance” to it as my other fanciful musings on what could possibly lead there. I have to conclude they will never find anyone conservative enough. I’m seriously trying to understand, though. How is Kavanaugh not conservative “enough”? I understand the worry about Souter, Kennedy, O’Connor, and how Republican presidents screw up sometimes while Democratic presidents are perfect at picking justices, but where is the evidence that Kav is a closet Souter? Did Souter write conservative opinions before being appointed to the Court? Did he ever use the phrase “abortion on demand” in an opinion? (And that’s a bonus hint to those on the left: anyone who uses that phrase will overturn Roe tomorrow). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/50 "2018-07-11T04:05:35Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > What’s your opinion on the Kelo decision? I disagree with _Kelo v. New London_. I don’t think that the takings clause should, or can, be fairly read to permit taking of property for private ownership. I think “public use” is essentially meaningless if it includes private ownership. ---
**Author:** ![pkbites](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pkbites/32/204_2.png) [@pkbites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pkbites)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/51 "2018-07-11T04:37:30Z")
Eventually SCOTUS will take up another 2nd Amendment case. When that happens it looks like Kavanaugh is the man to have there. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/52 "2018-07-11T04:45:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > For me, though, it’s significant that his change of mind did not translate into a belief that the constitution should be read to prevent such investigations, but merely that Congress should consider enacting legislation. Because of course that means letting the Republicans and the Republicans alone decide what to do with Trump, which means he can break the law with impunity. Kavanaugh is like any other Republican; he’ll pick whichever option favors his party the most and enables the most corruption. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 4:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/53 "2018-07-11T04:48:32Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > Because of course that means letting the Republicans and the Republicans alone decide what to do with Trump, which means he can break the law with impunity. > > Kavanaugh is like any other Republican; he’ll pick whichever option favors his party the most and enables the most corruption. Kavanaugh made this statement in 2009. I’ll leave it up to you to guess which party was in charge of Congress and the Presidency. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/54 "2018-07-11T04:49:33Z")
> [@pkbites](#): > > Eventually SCOTUS will take up another 2nd Amendment case. When that happens it looks like Kavanaugh is the man to have there. I’m hopeful that’s true, but also a bit skeptical. If you read the dissent in Heller II that he wrote, he essentially abandoned the 1st amendment analysis analogue that other circuits used and relied almost solely on history, long standing laws, etc. He got the result right, but his reasoning says that machine gun bans are okay because 1986 Hughes is long standing. Wut? His read of Heller was in my view way way off base. With that kind of squishy reasoning, he could go either way on reciprocity, concealed carry, etc. At least with the other person, Hardigan , i think, he wrote the dissent in The NJ carry case, Filco. He would have been better. Sykes wrote the opinion in Ezell which is an excellent analysis of 2nd amendment jurisprudence that I hope the court eventually adopts. So yeah, he’s not a liberal, but I wouldn’t think a slam dunk at this point. SCOTUS hasn’t granted cert on any gun cases really, if they start doing so with Kavanaugh there then it was Roberts and Kennedy that fell away from the Heller 5. If that’s so, having Kavanaugh there to grant cert but not having Roberts vote could be disastrous. So yeah, Ginsburg can retire any time now and that’s be fine by me 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/55 "2018-07-11T05:11:02Z")
Some of his writing is discussed in this article. > **[Brett Kavanaugh is a better Supreme Court pick than Trump realizes](https://nypost.com/2018/07/10/brett-kavanaugh-is-a-better-supreme-court-pick-than-trump-realizes/)** > > Upon being nominated to the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh said he had “witnessed firsthand” President Trump’s “appreciation for the vital role of the American judiciary.” That raised some eyebrows… I like this position that administrative agencies should be kept in check. > [@](#): > > Kavanaugh’s broader critique of excessive deference to administrative agencies also should be music to the ears of anyone who worries about an overweening executive branch. In a 2016 Harvard Law Review article, Kavanaugh called the doctrine favoring agency interpretations of “ambiguous” statutes “an atextual invention” that amounts to “a judicially orchestrated shift of power from Congress to the Executive Branch.” > > Such deference also shifts power away from judges, who instead of settling on the best interpretation of the law are supposed to accept any “reasonable” reading that an agency offers as an excuse for its assertion of power. That expectation, Kavanaugh observed, “encourages the Executive Branch (whichever party controls it) to be extremely aggressive in seeking to squeeze its policy goals into ill-fitting statutory authorizations and restraints. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/56 "2018-07-11T05:53:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I disagree with _Kelo v. New London_. I don’t think that the takings clause should, or can, be fairly read to permit taking of property for private ownership. I think “public use” is essentially meaningless if it includes private ownership. I feel that’s a common misreading of the decision. A lot of people read about the case and decided that this was an issue of judicial overreach - the court stepping in and taking people’s property. But the Supreme Court didn’t take Kelo’s property; the City of New London did. The decision did not endorse New London’s law or condemn it. They said it wasn’t unconstitutional. And therefore, the decision over what was reasonable public use was better made by elected legislators in New London - and thousand of other towns and cities - who were answerable to local voters than by nine judges sitting in Washington. The majority didn’t say yes and they didn’t say no; they said it shouldn’t be our decision. It was pure judicial restraint. Or as you put it _“That’s what I want judges to do: render under Congress what is Congress’.”_ ---
**Author:** ![kopek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kopek/32/337_2.png) [@kopek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kopek)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 6:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/57 "2018-07-11T06:39:51Z")
Considering what I know of the others on the list and the leftovers from the last list; he’s about the best I see happening. I’ll wait and see what comes out of the hearings. ---
**Author:** ![N9IWP](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/n9iwp/32/3154_2.png) [@N9IWP](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/N9IWP)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/58 "2018-07-11T10:33:29Z")
I say since (IIRC) Trump has officially registered for 2020, the campaign is technically in progress and so the Senate should wait until the next Presidential election… Brian ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/59 "2018-07-11T12:18:35Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > This. > > The endorsement of President PantsOnHead is all the record they need to know. > [@UltraVires](#): > > And I’m sure that both of you withheld judgment until after the announcement last night, then read through all 300 of Kavanaugh’s opinions and came to a reasoned decision to oppose him. Extrapolate much? I did not express an opinion about Kavanaugh in that statment. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2018, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642/60 "2018-07-11T12:30:53Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > And I’m sure that both of you withheld judgment until after the announcement last night, then read through all 300 of Kavanaugh’s opinions and came to a reasoned decision to oppose him. I actually remember somewhat the controversy surrounding him circa 2006, when Republicans were threatening to invoke the nuclear option to get him and several other judges confirmed. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/brett-kavanaugh-is-the-new-supreme-court-nominee-any-thoughts/817642.md?page=4)