# Did they lie during their Supreme Court confirmation hearings? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 2, 2022, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278 "2022-07-02T03:23:56Z")\ **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 2, 2022, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/41 "2022-07-02T20:04:26Z")
I thought this thread was Ihmo. I don’t normally express strong opinions in politics & elections. Obviously What the Judges did to get on the Supreme Court rubs a raw nerve. It’s hard to stay dispassionate and purely logical. Mea culpa ---
**Author:** ![Gatopescado](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gatopescado/32/5711_2.png) [@Gatopescado](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gatopescado)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2022, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/42 "2022-07-02T20:41:55Z")
> [@StraightTalk](#): > > Kavanaugh… … lied more than my old Dachshund did when he was temporarily paralyzed (in my opinon, of course 😉 ). Boff that plagiarist! ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2022, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/43 "2022-07-02T21:27:09Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > If you put them under oath they would just plead the 5th. Not at a Congressional hearing. > [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > They didn’t almost answer. They blatantly and proudly gave non-answers with minimal factual content, everyone who actually cared about women’s reproductive choice _screamed it from the rooftops_ at the time,… > [@Cervaise](#): > > The better question is to ask something like, “Was Roe decided correctly?” > [@aceplace57](#): > > That happens when judges are evasive in their confirmation hearings. It didn’t matter. If Kavenaugh or Barrett had clearly said “Yeppers, we are gonna overthrow Roe at the first good chance we have!” they still would have gotten in. So did they lie? Sorta. Did they commit perjury? Probably not. > [@betonbill](#): > > All three of the justices knew what side of the bread was buttered. And they all definitely knew just WHY they had been nominated in the first place. Gorsuch was almost a compromise, as his background was solid, and he was known more as a strict constructionist. But the other two were blatantly hired assassins to kill Roe. > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Well, of the six “devote Catholics”, one was in the dissent. Yeah, and Roberts kinda hemmed and hawed. > [@aceplace57](#): > > The Church has lead the fight against Roe v Wade for fifty years. They organized and raised the money for the political fight. _Encouraged_ the violent protests and even attacks at clinics. Not so much. This isn’t coming from the Catholic church, so much as the Evangelical movement. > [@aceplace57](#): > > I’m personally ashamed that we as a majority didn’t fight back thirty years ago and preserved Roe v Wade as Federal law. “we” meaning the GOP??? The GOP controlled the House from 1995 - 2007. ---
**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 2, 2022, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/44 "2022-07-02T22:30:45Z")
Roe v Wade should have been protected by Law when bipartisanship still made it possible. At that time, no one saw the need. Why take a unneeded political hit? Roe protects womens reproductive rights. We had wars to fight and terrorists to chase. The conservative judges at that time didn’t appear that strongly against Roe. It was the loss of RGB and appointments of Kavanaugh and Barrett that tipped the scales. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2022, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/45 "2022-07-02T23:12:18Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Senators should base confirmation votes on a nominee’s paper trail, and cheerfully vote against anyone who dodges questions about how they’d decide major issues of the day or insists they’re not motivated by religious or other personal beliefs. That is what senators of both parties did with Robert Bork, and for the last thirty-five years conservatives won’t shut the fuck up about how “the smartest lawyer in the country” [sic] was denied his deserved place on the Supreme Court because of ‘partisanship’. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/46 "2022-07-03T00:10:40Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Roe v Wade should have been protected by Law when bipartisanship still made it possible. There has likely never been a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate ready to codify _Roe_ into law. Even after the 2008 elections, when Senate Democrats’ 60 seats made them theoretically filibuster-proof, that majority included several pro-life Democrats and Democrats from red states that would have opposed the measure. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/47 "2022-07-03T00:14:27Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > In these (and others) she suggests several other ways the Court could have ruled in _Roe_. Two of them were either of sex discrimination grounds or due to the overbroad nature of the statute. Oh, I see, you mean that even though Ginsburg always held the opinion that women do have a constitutional right to an abortion, and thus it was not “wrong” for the Roe decision to assert the existence of such a right, it should have been justified on different constitutional grounds: hence, “wrongly decided”. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/48 "2022-07-03T01:18:27Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Roe v Wade should have been protected by Law when bipartisanship still made it possible. At that time, no one saw the need. When was that? > [@aceplace57](#): > > It was the loss of RGB and appointments of Kavanaugh and Barrett that tipped the scales. True. > [@flurb](#): > > There has likely never been a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate ready to codify _Roe_ into law. Even after the 2008 elections, when Senate Democrats’ 60 seats made them theoretically filibuster-proof, that majority included several pro-life Democrats and Democrats from red states that would have opposed the measure. Yep. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/49 "2022-07-03T02:38:14Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > If a candidate for the Supreme Court shouldn’t announce, in advance, how he’ll rule on particular cases, then an actual Justice damn sure shouldn’t be making those comments. Well as a candidate they actually have to care about whether they might be seen as biased. But once their confirmed to a life time appointment who gives a hoot what people think of them. Least of all Thomas, who has on multiple occasions ruled on cases that his wife has advocated for. He clearly doesn’t give a damn about the appearance impartiality. ---
**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 3, 2022, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/50 "2022-07-03T11:46:42Z")
I can’t recall the exact testimony from the long Congressional testimony. I do recall assurances from Barrett and Kavanaugh that they could set aside personal convictions and rule impartially. They also said, IIRC there needed to be a valid and urgent reason to review Roe. For example _Plessy_ v. _Ferguson_ improperly supported segregation and resulted in inequities in schools, jobs,businesses, and other parts of life. There was a urgent need to rule against it with _Brown_ _v_ . _Board_ _of_ _Education_. We didn’t have that with Roe. It had already been modified with newer rulings to reflect advances in embryo and fetal research. Objectivity is easier to maintain in criminal cases. Someone is accused of a crime and the case is presented. The judge isn’t invested in the case. The outcome depends on the strength of the evidence and how the jury or judge perceives it. Is it beyond a reasonable doubt? The appealate judges look for procedural errors in lower court trials. They’re own bias or value doesn’t apply. The Supreme Court is supposed to only look at whats in the Constitution and interpret it. I’m no longer convinced a judge that personally disapproves of gay marriage,birth control, abortion, or other social issues can totally ignore their own bias. I don’t know a solution. How do you find impartial candidates for the Supreme Court? ---
**Author:** ![DavidNRockies](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidnrockies/32/6279_2.png) [@DavidNRockies](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DavidNRockies)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/51 "2022-07-03T14:14:29Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > “no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States." Article VI Yeah. I think most of us know the law on this, but – for Conservatives: - The **[Federalist Society](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_Society)** is to the Judiciary as - **[Ghislaine Maxwell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghislaine_Maxwell)** was to **[Jeffrey Epstein](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein)** Happy to elaborate if the point isn’t clear 😉 ---
**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 3, 2022, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/52 "2022-07-03T15:04:42Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Not so much. This isn’t coming from the Catholic church, so much as the Evangelical movement. Yeah, was about to comment, Evangelicals reading those posts must have been going, what am I, chopped liver? The Court has had non-Protestants overrepresented for a while and carried on just fine. It’s the ascent of Federalist Society-vetted so-called “originalists” that’s a problem now. In case y’all did not notice _it’s not only about abortion, it’s not the ONLY goddamn issue_ where the new majorities are screwing us over. Voting rights, environmental protection, corporate persons’ “rights”, labor issues, defendants’ rights, you name it. It’s not “because they are devout Catholics” it’s “because they’ve been vetted to support an illiberal view of the Constitution”. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/53 "2022-07-03T15:17:01Z")
First off, there’s no doubt at all that the justices intended to overturn Roe all along. That being said, it would be a bad precedent to compel justices to always stick to their word according to what they said in Senate confirmation hearings. By such logic, if a justice hypothetically said “I will not legalize marijuana” when being grilled by the Senate in 1980, but changed his mind by the 2010s and voted to legalize it, he’d be considered a perjurer rather than someone who simply changed his mind as people are wont to do. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/54 "2022-07-03T18:02:48Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > The Supreme Court is supposed to only look at whats in the Constitution and interpret it. I’m no longer convinced a judge that personally disapproves of gay marriage,birth control, abortion, or other social issues can totally ignore their own bias. Can a judge that personally approves of gay marriage, birth control, or abortion, (or disapproves of gun ownership) totally ignore THEIR own bias? ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/55 "2022-07-03T19:45:24Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > The only one who lied, I think, was Susan Collins when she acted surprised about their votes. I, on the other hand, think she was really that dumb. ---
**Author:** ![DeadTreasSecretaries](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deadtreassecretaries/32/4817_2.png) [@DeadTreasSecretaries](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DeadTreasSecretaries)\ **Post date:** [July 3, 2022, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/56 "2022-07-03T23:15:10Z")
[![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/VSEs7QJyCtY/maxresdefault.jpg "Pro Life") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSEs7QJyCtY) ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [July 4, 2022, 9:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/57 "2022-07-04T09:28:46Z")
There are a number of comments upthread implying that Congress should have codified abortion rights instead of relying on _Roe v Wade_ being settled law. I’m certain that would have made no difference. The fundamental problem here is a highly ideological and activist Supreme Court that has empowered itself to act as a super-legislature, and this was true even before Trump appointed the three lunatics, dutifully following the instructions of the far right. This is the sort of court whose rulings on political matters are both predictable and predetermined, and whose references to the Constitution are just _post hoc_ rationalizations. They do this even when their rulings contradict the _ **plain wording** _ of the Constitution, as Scalia did in _Heller_, or when their rulings contradict the long-standing tradition of not being any broader than necessary to resolve the matter before them, as Roberts did in _Citizens United_, or when their rulings overturn longstanding precedent, as Alito did with _Roe v Wade_. So if there had been, in a better world, federal legislation protecting abortion rights, one can easily imagine red states taking the matter to the Supreme Court, and it would have surprised no one to see this Court overturn the law on the purported grounds that the federal government has no power to legislate abortion rights. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2022, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/58 "2022-07-05T14:36:15Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > The Supreme Court is supposed to only look at whats in the Constitution and interpret it. I’m no longer convinced a judge that personally disapproves of gay marriage,birth control, abortion, or other social issues can totally ignore their own bias. > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Can a judge that personally approves of gay marriage, birth control, or abortion, (or disapproves of gun ownership) totally ignore THEIR own bias? To both of these–unequivocally, there are judges who can ignore their bias and rule impartially. That doesn’t mean “rule how a specific person may want”, but they can rule to some non-personal standard. Many of the justices involved in the original Roe decisions, as well as a number of Republican justices who upheld Roe repeatedly in the years after (guys like Souter, Kennedy et al.) came from conservative religious backgrounds and while I don’t know that they ever commented on it I assume were opposed to abortion on personal moral grounds, that didn’t affect how they ruled. Several of the liberal justices, including prominently RBG and Elena Kagan, have ruled against what the Democrats want on certain issues relating to executive power and policing, as well. I do think it is fair to say, based on recent evidence, that if a judge is a member of the Federalist society that should be seen as a promise to not be impartial, but rather to only rule in fealty to the Republican party, which is exactly why Roe has now been overturned, because they installed enough judges in the Federalist society to guarantee it. As I have said in other threads, the Supreme Court is only as legitimate as we allow it to be, once it became a purely partisan appendage the argument for respecting its legitimacy diminished. Even before then, it was still usually a semi-partisan body and should have had its powers curtailed ages ago (I was in favor of this as far back as the 70s, when it was usually Democrats who were arguing with me about how the court needed all these powers, now the parties have switched but my position remains the same.) ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2022, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/59 "2022-07-05T21:07:34Z")
The conservative justices don’t vote in lockstep, though. While Roberts and Kavanaugh joined the majority opinion 95% of the time this term, Gorsuch was in the majority only 75% of the time. Kagan & Breyer were in the majority at the same rate (69 and 68) and Sotomayer a little less at 58%. It seems to me that the latter justices vote the same way more often than the other six do. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [July 5, 2022, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278/60 "2022-07-05T21:12:04Z")
You’ve stated percentages. What argument are you presenting? Specifically in response to my claim that the Federalist society judges are simply subservient to the political desires of the GOP? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/did-they-lie-during-their-supreme-court-confirmation-hearings/967278.md?page=4)