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.”
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.
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”
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.
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.
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.
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.
The following article by Jordain Carney was posted on the Hill website July 29, 2018:
The Senate fight over documents related to President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court is boiling over.
Trump pick Brett Kavanaugh, a circuit judge since 2006 who previously worked for President George W. Bush’s administration and Kenneth Starr’s independent counsel investigation into former President Clinton, has a voluminous paper trail that lawmakers estimate tops a million pages.
Democrats want to see as many of those papers as they can, while Republicans seeking to confirm Kavanaugh before the midterm elections favor a narrower scope.
Americans across the country know the truth about Judge Kavanaugh: He would roll back women’s rights, the right to affordable and accessible health care, and would fail to be an independent check on the president. It’s clear why Kavanaugh is already one of the most unpopular Supreme Court nominees in recent history.
Americans agree that Kavanaugh is a threat to Americans’ health care:
“I am concerned about Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, as he has shown hostility to a person’s right to use birth control and to affordable health care. If he were on the Supreme Court, he would most likely try to limit my access to medication and surgeries that I will die without.” – Maine resident
The following article by Sheryl Gay Stolberg was posted on the New York Times website July 23, 2018:
Judge Kavanaugh, President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, on Capitol Hill. Credit: Al Drago,The New York Times
WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats are largely giving Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh the brushoff, refusing the customary “courtesy visits” until Republicans agree to turn over voluminous documents from the Supreme Court nominee’s past.
In the two weeks since President Trump nominated him to succeed the retiring Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Judge Kavanaugh has met with 23 Republicans, and not a single Democrat. Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said in an interview Monday that he would not meet with Judge Kavanaugh until the top Republican and the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee reach agreement on what documents should be produced.
And those two senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Dianne Feinstein of California, are still far apart.
