Day one of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for the United States Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh already witnessed dozens of outbursts and interruptions.
Fox News reported there were over 60 disruptions which totaled more than an hour of delays.
Republican Senator Lindsay Graham taunted his Democrat colleagues amid the protests when he took a line from former President Barack Obama, rewrapped it and gave it back to them.
“Election has consequences,” Obama said in January 2009. How’s this for a rewrapping:
“You had a chance and you lost. If you want to pick judges from your way of thinking, then you better win an election,” Graham said.
Graham also commented that some of the comments Democrats made towards Kavanaugh were “so hypocritical.”
From the Daily Caller:
Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina slammed Senate Democrats on Tuesday for opposing the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court before his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing commenced.
“I’m here to tell anybody in the country who listens that this is so hypocritical of my friends on the other side,” Graham said. “When it was their president, Kavanaugh was right. When you’re talking about Roe v. Wade, it’s okay to promise the nation it will never be overturned.”
Graham laid into Democrats for holding Republicans to a different standard than they hold members of their own party.
The South Carolina senator reminded the committee about that “crap” he received when he voted for Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor, both nominated by former president Barack Obama.
Graham went on to say that he voted for the Justices because he thought by any reasonable measure that they were qualified – something he said his Democrat colleagues were not doing with Kavanaugh.
Graham and other Republicans on the committee said the same standard should be applied to Kavanaugh and that he is already qualified by any reasonable measure.
Here is from Kavanaugh himself, per Washington Examiner:
For twelve years, I have been a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. I have written more than 300 opinions and handled more than 2,000 cases. I have given it my all in every case. I am proud of that body of work, and I stand behind it. I tell people, “Don’t read what others say about my judicial opinions. Read the opinions.” I have served with 17 other judges, each of them a colleague and a friend, on a court now led by our superb chief judge, Merrick Garland. My judicial philosophy is straightforward. A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. A judge must interpret statutes as written. A judge must interpret the Constitution as written, informed by history and tradition and precedent. In deciding cases, a judge must always keep in mind what Alexander Hamilton said in Federalist 83: “the rules of legal interpretation are rules of common sense.”
A good judge must be an umpire — a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no litigant or policy. As Justice Kennedy explained in Texas versus Johnson, one of his greatest opinions, judges do not make decisions to reach a preferred result. Judges make decisions because “the law and the Constitution, as we see them, compel the result.” Over the past 12 years, I have ruled sometimes for the prosecution and sometimes for criminal defendants, sometimes for workers and sometimes for businesses, sometimes for environmentalists and sometimes for coal miners. In each case, I have followed the law. I don’t decide cases based on personal or policy preferences. I am not a pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant judge. I am not a pro-prosecution or pro-defense judge. I am a pro-law judge.
As Justice Kennedy showed us, a judge must be independent, not swayed by public pressure. Our independent Judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic. In our independent Judiciary, the Supreme Court is the last line of defense for the separation of powers, and the rights and liberties guaranteed by the Constitution.
Sounds qualified by any reasonable measure – of course, there is more to be heard through the next six days of hearings.
President Trump and the White House similarly put out a statement commending the nominee.
“Judge Kavanaugh has impeccable credentials, unsurpassed qualifications, and a proven commitment to equal justice under the law… There is no one in America more qualified for this position, and no one more deserving,” Trump said.
And, “Judge Kavanaugh’s extensive experience and credentials make him one of the most exceptionally qualified Supreme Court nominees in history.”
Here’s more from their statement:
- On the night of his nomination, USA Today reported that “[o]n paper … Kavanaugh may be the most qualified Supreme Court nominee in generations.”
- The American Bar Association unanimously gave him its highest rating: well-qualified.
- He has served on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, often called the Nation’s “second highest court,” for more than 12 years.
- He has written more than 300 opinions and heard more than 2,000 cases.
- At least 13 of his opinions have been vindicated by the Supreme Court—an unparalleled record of influence and success across the ideological spectrum.
- He is a co-author of a leading book on judicial precedent and has published nine articles in respected academic law journals.
See even more here.Note: The author of this article has included commentary that expresses an opinion and analysis of the facts.