I know what you’re probably thinking — “Borked” isn’t a real word. Well, it is, and it comes from the hyper-political nomination of Judge Robert Bork back in 1987. This was the first time in modern history that politics truly ruled who sat on the Supreme Court. Prior to that, nominees had been rejected for reasons such as their racist views and various ethical conflicts. Judge Bork was an originalist judge who held conservative viewpoints. His work as a legal scholar was so well-respected that he was even offered a professorship at Yale, which is far from a conservative institution. However, due to a now-famous statement from Senate powerhouse Ted Kennedy, the nomination turned political and was ultimately derailed.
Only four years later in 1991, now-Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas was nominated to the court. His hearing went on with little to no issues until a leaked FBI report regarding the sexual harassment of Anita Hill was released. Hill testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee detailing what had happened between her and Thomas. She was ultimately disregarded for various reasons. However, her testimony left a major impact on this country. Thomas was confirmed by a narrow 52-48 margin, and former President George H. W. Bush then decided to support a bill allowing for sexual harassment victims to seek damages on the federal level. In addition, private companies began programs to deter sexual harassment.
These two Supreme Court nominations from the past now lead to the one before us today: the promotion of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the position of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Kavanaugh has served on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit since 2006. This court is considered to be the “second highest” court in the United States. His long tenure on the court has led to a long paper trail for members of the Senate to review. But that’s not where the issues of today lie. Instead, the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee have decided that, because this nominee is not a liberal who will rewrite laws from the bench of the court, they are going to do everything possible to oppose him at every single step. This has turned into a combination of Bork’s and Thomas’s hearings.
First, Senator Chuck Schumer declared his opposition without even knowing anything about the nominee, leading the charge for Democratic opposition. They proclaimed that he is a radical even though he sides with the majority more than 96% of the time. This includes rulings from former President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, who serves with Kavanaugh on the DC circuit. Garland was on the same side as Kavanaugh 95% of the time. Not one Democratic senator opposed Garland, so why do they all oppose Kavanaugh?
Second, senators attempted to make false accusations about Kavanaugh. Specifically, Senator Kamala Harris took a quote from the hearings completely out of context, and even after media outlets said it was not true. In addition, Senator Corey Booker had his “Spartacus” moment when he released documents that he thought weren’t approved for release, even though they were. Booker proclaimed “This is about the closest I’ll probably ever have in my life to an ‘I am Spartacus’ moment.” I’m 99% sure Booker has no idea what actually happens in the movie Spartacus. For those of you who don’t know Spartacus did not martyr himself like Booker attempted to. And even though Booker thought those documents would be damning, they only proved that Kavanaugh was against racial profiling in the aftermath of 9/11.
After none of that worked, Senator Dianne Feinstein released information about a potential sexual assault committed by Kavanaugh over 35 years ago. Feinstein waited two months to come forward with this information, which is obviously a blatant attempt to delay the nomination. Unfortunately, this did delay the vote, even though no investigation has been opened, and a letter from over 60 of Kavanaugh’s classmates denies that this event happened. If the allegations are true, President Trump should pull the nomination; otherwise, I see no reason for him not to serve.
All of the actual arguments against him are over his views on presidential power and the scope of the Fourth Amendment. Otherwise, the issues simply become partisan politics. I’m not interested in the political arguments like overturning Roe v. Wade (mainly because that would just make abortion a state issue again) or his views on campaign finance laws because there is already precedent in the court for all of that. Now personally, I’m not a fan of his track record on the Fourth Amendment or presidential powers, but who knows — maybe that will change. If Senator Rand Paul thinks that Kavanaugh will follow the Fourth Amendment, then I really can’t see why he shouldn’t serve. Kavanaugh is wildly well-qualified for this position and deserves it after the attempted Borking.
Be First to Comment