Tag: Brett Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh Feared Looking ‘Silly’ on Flip-Flop on Presidential Records

The following article by Todd Ruger was posted on the Roll Call website August 13, 2018:

Documents show Supreme Court nominee fretted about position switch while working in White House

Long before the current Senate fight over access to presidential records as part of his Supreme Court nomination, Brett Kavanaugh sent an email to his co-workers in the White House counsel’s office about a soon-to-be-published article on access to presidential records that “makes me look very silly.”

Kavanaugh let the office know that Washington Post columnist Al Kamen planned to write a blurb to highlight how he had switched legal positions — now that he was a lawyer in the George W. Bush administration — when it comes to how much power former presidents and their families had to block the release of presidential records.

“I apologize in advance,” Kavanaugh wrote in the email, one of about 88,000 pages of documents about his work in the White House released Sunday as part of the confirmation process. “I will be screaming into a pillow at staff meeting in the morning. Uggghhhhh.”

View the complete post here.

NEW POLL: Kavanaugh Least Popular Supreme Court Nominee In 30 Years

A new poll released today shows that Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Kavanaugh, has the lowest public support of any Supreme Court candidate since 1987, and “receives a cooler public reception than nearly every nominee for the last four administrations.”

Kavanaugh is historically unpopular:

  • A plurality of Americans say the Senate should not vote to confirm Kavanaugh, and his support is the lowest of any nominee in the past thirty years.

  • Only 28 percent of women say Kavanaugh should be confirmed.

  • A plurality of Americans say Republicans should turn over more documents from Kavanaugh’s career before a confirmation vote.

Republicans Rush Kavanaugh Hearing Before The Senate Receives Key Records

Senate Republicans are trying to rush through the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh by holding his hearing before the Senate is able to see a key subset of his records. Judge Kavanaugh is being considered for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land, and the American people deserve to know who he is. What are Republicans trying to hide?

Senate Republicans plan to begin Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing on September 4 – many weeks before a subset of Kavanaugh’s records can be released.

CBS News: “The National Archives informed the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Thursday that his request for documents regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh can’t be fulfilled until the end of October. Chairman Chuck Grassley had asked for Kavanaugh’s emails and paper filings from his time as Bush’s associate White House counsel, and more documents pertaining to his nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.” Continue reading “Republicans Rush Kavanaugh Hearing Before The Senate Receives Key Records”

At Bush White House, Kavanaugh Offered Help on Terrorism Prisoners, Email Shows Image

The following article by Charlie Savage and Michael D. Shear was posted on the New York Times August 9, 2018:

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, denied in 2006 that he had been involved in terrorism detainee policies. Credit: T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Brett M. Kavanaugh volunteered to prepare a senior Bush administration official to testify about the government’s monitoring of conversations between certain terrorism suspects and their lawyers after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, a newly disclosed White House email shows.

The email appeared likely to become a focus at Judge Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing this year. Democrats have suggested that he misled the Senate at his 2006 appeals court confirmation hearing, when he turned aside questions about the George W. Bush administration’s handling of terrorism suspects by saying that he was “not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants” and by portraying his portfolio as focusing on “civil justice issues” like terrorism insurance.

The email, released Thursday, was part of a trove of about 5,700 pages of documents involving Judge Kavanaugh’s time as an associate White House counsel.

View the complete article here.

Brett Kavanaugh Threatens Americans’ Fundamental Right to Vote

The following article by Connor Maxwell was posted on the Center for American Progress website August 9, 2018:

Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh poses for photographs in front of a painting of President Ronald Reagan, July 17, 2018. Credit: Chip Somodevilla via Getty Images

This week marked the 53rd anniversary of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). In the years since the VRA’s enactment, however, its protections have not gone unchallenged. In a 2013 decision in Shelby v. Holder, a conservative majority on the U.S. Supreme Court gutted Section 5 of the VRA, a provision that prevented certain jurisdictions from unilaterally manipulating their voting policies and procedures. This ruling allowed legislators to enact discriminatory laws that make voting more difficult for both people of color and low-income Americans. With the retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy this past July, it is essential that the Senate demand a fair, independent nominee who will defend the fundamental rights of Americans.

Brett M. Kavanaugh is not that nominee. Throughout his career, he has demonstrated a willingness to turn a blind eye to voter suppression and racial discrimination. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, Americans will almost certainly face further erosion of their voting rights.

Kavanaugh’s record shows a willingness to diminish the voices of marginalized groups

As counsel of record for Kirkland and Ellis in 1999, Kavanaugh defended efforts to strip away the rights of Native Hawaiians in choosing the state official responsible for protecting the rights and culture of Hawaii’s indigenous peoples. Kavanaugh argued that giving this choice to Native Hawaiians, instead of all Hawaiian voters, constituted racial separatism rather than an effort to support a community that suffered historic injusticesat the hands of the U.S. government. This demonstrates not only his ignorance of the systems that perpetuate inequality but also his willingness to diminish the voices of marginalized groups for political gain. In the wake of the case, Kavanaugh criticized the Clinton administration in The Wall Street Journal for its support of voting rights for Native Hawaiians. After the election of President George W. Bush, Kavanaugh was hired as an associate by the White House counsel, Alberto Gonzalez. Later, he was nominated to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit.

View the complete article here.

Brett Kavanaugh once predicted ‘one race’ in the eyes of government. Would he end affirmative action?

The following article by Ann E. Marimow was posted on the Washington Post website August 7, 2018:

The Post’s Robert Barnes explains some of the factors that could influence whether Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh is confirmed. (Video: Monica Akhtar/Photo: Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

In the spring of 2015, Brett M. Kavanaugh returned to his alma mater in New Haven, Conn., to address the Black Law Students Association. The student who introduced him said Kavanaugh was concerned that African Americans and other minorities were being shut out of coveted clerkships with federal judges like him.

Kavanaugh concluded the session by handing out his email address and phone number and encouraging the Yale students to apply. Indeed, two of Kava­naugh’s four law clerks this year were African American students he met during annual visits to Yale, and Kavanaugh and his supporters have touted his record of hiring young lawyers from diverse backgrounds to work with him at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

“It was important to him that everyone have access,” recalled Rakim Brooks, who introduced the judge that day and completed a year-long clerkship with him this summer just as President Trump announced Kava­naugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

View the complete article here.

Trump Supreme Court pick: Presidents can ignore laws they think are unconstitutional

According to a new report, Judge Kavanaugh said in 2013 that the president can ignore laws they think are unconstitutional and he defended the Bush administration’s use of signing statements. We already know Kavanaugh would fail to be an independent check on the president. Now, we see why Republicans are trying to hide Kavanaugh’s records from senators and the American people. What else are they trying to hide?

CNN: Trump Supreme Court pick: Presidents can ignore laws they think are unconstitutional

By Manu Raju

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in 2013 asserted that it’s a “traditional exercise” of presidential power to ignore laws the White House views as unconstitutional, as he defended the controversial practice of signing statements prevalent in George W. Bush’s White House.

The comments could put a renewed focus on Kavanaugh’s time serving as White House staff secretary, who had a role in coordinating Bush’s statements accompanying legislation he signed into law. Critics contend that the Bush White House abused the use of signing statements to ignore laws passed by Congress, though Bush and his allies said such statements were no different than the practices of other administrations.

(MORE)

Voters want their senators to reject Trump’s Supreme Court nominee

The following article by Emily Crockett was posted on the ShareBlue.com website July 31, 2018:

Red state Senate Democrats have every reason to vote against Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court — and nothing to lose if they do.

AP Photo, Alex Brandon

According to recent polling, even vulnerable Senate Democrats in red states have absolutely nothing to lose by opposing Trump’s extreme Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh.

Republicans are eager to push Kavanaugh’s nomination through the Senate before the November midterm elections. And some Democratic senators from red states — namely West Virginia’s Joe Manchin, North Dakota’s Heidi Heitkamp, Indiana’s Joe Donnelly, and Missouri’s Claire McCaskill — have been noncommittal about opposing Kavanaugh.

But they really don’t need to be. Yes, their Republican opponents would probably try to use such a vote against them. But those attacks just aren’t likely to land with voters, and could even backfire.

View the complete article here.

Trump’s Supreme Court nominee once helped Trump crush a casino union

The following article by Emily Crockett was posted on the ShareBlue.com website July 30, 2018:

Credit: Associated Press

A 2012 ruling by Brett Kavanaugh made sure Trump was able to screw over his own casino workers.

Trump is well-known for screwing over working people — both the people who work for him directly, and the people who voted for him because they believed his lies about bringing back jobs.

So it’s not surprising that Trump would pick a Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, who virulently opposes workers’ rights.

What is surprising? It turns out that Kavanaugh directly helped Trump to screw over his own casino workers, Bloomberg reports.

View the complete post here.

Bush Claimed Power to Override a Torture Ban. What Did Brett Kavanaugh Think About That? Image

The following article by Charlie Savage was posted on the New York Times website July 29, 2018:

Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court, handled draft signing statements when working as staff secretary for President George W. Bush. Credit: Erin Schaff for The New York Times

WASHINGTON — When Brett M. Kavanaugh came before the Judiciary Committee in May 2006 for his nomination to be an appeals court judge, senators pressed him on his role in President George W. Bush’s use of signing statements to claim the power to bypass new laws — like a much-disputed assertion the previous December that he could override a ban on torture.

Judge Kavanaugh, who at the time was the White House staff secretary, acknowledged handling draft signing statements to ensure that “relevant members of the administration have provided input” before presenting them to Mr. Bush. But the nominee sidestepped questions about any advice or views he had about them, refusing to discuss “internal matters” and pivoting instead to a description of a 1952 Supreme Court opinion that explains how to analyze separation-of-powers disputes in general.

Now that President Trump has nominated Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, the opacity of his testimony about Mr. Bush’s signing statements, including about the torture ban, is becoming a case study for Democrats’ vehement arguments that the Senate must see his staff secretary files before any confirmation hearing. Democrats have already been raising concerns that Judge Kavanaugh may hold too expansive a view of executive power in other contexts, like his skepticism about the wisdom of forcing a president to answer questions in criminal investigations.

View the complete article here.