Is it fair to be bringing up a high school alleged incident forty years later in confirmation hearings?

I would blush even suggesting this is relevant when the alleged victim will not testify or be named. How divided will this country get before common sense prevails.

2seaoat wrote:I would blush even suggesting this is relevant when the alleged victim will not testify or be named.  How divided will this country get before common sense prevails.

Maybe when you stop supporting right-wing zealots for the Supreme Court.

I would not say that I support this nominee, but I am certain he is highly qualified and has a massive record of his decisions which should be the measure of the confirmation. I am appalled by this tactic. Earl Warren was a Republican governor when he was put on the Supreme Court and lead a revolution of expansion of rights when the pundits said otherwise. We heard how the highly qualified chief Justice Roberts was going to do all these dastardly things....he voted consistent with the law and the power of Congress to tax and affirmed the Affordable Care Act.

These confirmation hearings are becoming unseemly. Politics has no place in placing qualified brilliant Jurist on the court. It used to be almost unanimous confirmations, and now it has become a chit show.

Hubby and I are both rather shocked that Feinstein would do this; she's been around the block a time or two and surely should've foreseen this would only work in favor of the nominee. It seems completely senseless.

The woman also claimed Kavanaugh was joined at the time by a friend who turned up music to conceal her protests. But that unnamed classmate reportedly told the New Yorker, “I have no recollection of that.”

Meanwhile, the Judiciary Committee on Friday received a letter from 65 women who said they knew Kavanaugh from high school and vouched for him as a “good person.” The letter was addressed to Feinstein and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa. “We are women who have known Brett Kavanaugh for more than 35 years and knew him while he attended high school between 1979 and 1983,” “For the entire time we have known Brett Kavanaugh, he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect. We strongly believe it is important to convey this information to the committee at this time.”

2seaoat wrote:These confirmation hearings are becoming unseemly.  Politics has no place in placing qualified brilliant Jurist on the court.

Merrick Garland!

In answer to the question posed in the title to this thread: Is it fair...


Why God Is Laughing at Brett Kavanaugh

American politics is about power, not principle. If anyone should know this, it's Brett Kavanaugh.

God, it’s sometimes said, has an awesome sense of humor; if so, the Almighty must have been vastly entertained by the turns of fortune on display this past weekend in American politics.

Not amused, to be clear, by the sad story of what a middle-aged university professor recalls of an ugly night in high school with future Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and how it echoed in her mind for years. An uproar over this allegation Sunday pivoted quickly from the first question—what’s true?—to an equally vexing one: What is even fair to be debating some 36 years after the fact?

It is on this point that the cosmos may be having a laugh not just at Kavanaugh’s expense but at many other people’s. After decades of competitive moralizing and situational ethics—in which every accuser in due course becomes the accused, and anyone riding a high horse can expect to be bucked off—even the concept of fairness in American politics seemingly is defunct.

Three decades of remorseless ideological and cultural combat—over Robert Bork, over Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill, over Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich, over Bush v. Gore, and, at last and above all, over Donald Trump—have made the question virtually irrelevant.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/17/kavanaugh-supreme-court-ford-sexual-assault-219983


Fairness has never been relevant in American politics.

I asked the same question about the stupid, chickenshit accusation against Kavanaugh--now I realize why the question is naive: When has it ever been about fairness?

Fuck Kavanaugh.

The supreme court should not be an unfair place of petty politics, rather is should be brilliant jurist fairly applying the law. I see this nominee being hardened like Thomas was to criticism. Thomas has yet to participate in an oral argument as he sits as an angry reactionary judge who is simply filling space with the proposition that he will get even with the bastards who sullied his good name. I could understand if there was independent witnesses which confirm the story, or even a police report which could legitimately debate he said she said, but almost fifty years of silence about an alleged high school party. I understand why I remain a Republican because as much as I hate Trump, I do not find this any better than his antics.

2seaoat wrote:  I understand why I remain a Republican because as much as I hate Trump, I do not find this any better than his antics.

So you're okay with Merrick Garland and Bush v. Gore?

RealLindaL wrote:Hubby and I are both rather shocked that Feinstein would do this; she's been around the block a time or two and surely should've foreseen this would only work in favor of the nominee.   It seems completely senseless.

Further, she reportedly received thsi allegation two months ago and has kept it under wraps until the last day of the hearing.

It's pretty obvious to anyone with a brain it's just more loony leftist lies.

ConservaLady wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:Hubby and I are both rather shocked that Feinstein would do this; she's been around the block a time or two and surely should've foreseen this would only work in favor of the nominee.   It seems completely senseless.

Further, she reportedly received thsi allegation two months ago and has kept it under wraps until the last day of the hearing.

It's pretty obvious to anyone with a brain it's just more loony leftist lies.

Hey, Seaoat, your date for the High School party is here.

You can't slow down a Supreme Court confirmation, say the people who held a seat open for 14 months.

I mean, who are you supposed to believe -- a women who risked everything to expose the worst moment of her life or the guy who spent the last week lying to the Senate?

Hi conlady a question... When was the last time Donald Trump went to
church?- Asking for everyone that believes he believes.

First, after what they did to Merrick Garland, I don't give a flyin' fuck about "fairness" regarding Republicans and Supreme Court nominees. They can shut their goddamned yaps about "fairness" given the garbage they pulled.

Second, yeah, absolutely this should be brought up. If someone nominated to the highest court in the land has a past of being a rapist and a blackout drunk, that's something that should be considered. The Republicans knew this was coming, because they sure got that list of 60-something people together way too fast to have not been working on it in advance. Also, the accuser mentioned this is therapy back in 2013, so it's not likely to be anything bogus.

It should also be investigated why Kavanaugh suddenly jumped to the top of Trump's list when he wasn't even on his two previous large lists of potential nominees. It looks awfully suspicious that he's only being moved up because he doesn't believe in prosecuting presidents for crimes. I don't think a president under investigation should be allowed to pick people who might be judging him down the line. You want looney, thinking that is reasonable is fucking looney.

2seaoat wrote:The supreme court should not be an unfair place of petty politics, rather is should be brilliant jurist fairly applying the law.  I see this nominee being hardened like Thomas was to criticism.  Thomas has yet to participate in an oral argument as he sits as an angry reactionary judge who is simply filling space with the proposition that he will get even with the bastards who sullied his good name.  I could understand if there was independent witnesses which confirm the story, or even a police report which could legitimately debate he said she said, but almost fifty years of silence about an alleged high school party.   I understand why I remain a Republican because as much as I hate Trump, I do not find this any better than his antics.

Exactly who in your party leadership do you admire? And why? And please explain away about Merrick Garland. Scalia passed away in February, a good 9 months before the election. Obama was NOT under investigation. Your party "leadership" decided not even to have the decency to hear arguments on his confirmation, so we got Gorsuch, appointed by Drumpf. If there was any honor left in the GOP, they wouldn't continue to carry water for this completely unqualified, corrupt and immoral *president.

California professor, writer of confidential Brett Kavanaugh letter, speaks out about her allegation of sexual assault

By Emma Brown
September 16 at 10:28 PM

Earlier this summer, Christine Blasey Ford wrote a confidential letter to a senior Democratic lawmaker alleging that Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than three decades ago, when they were high school students in suburban Maryland. Since Wednesday, she has watched as that bare-bones version of her story became public without her name or her consent, drawing a blanket denial from Kavanaugh and roiling a nomination that just days ago seemed all but certain to succeed.

Now, Ford has decided that if her story is going to be told, she wants to be the one to tell it.

Speaking publicly for the first time, Ford said that one summer in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh and a friend — both “stumbling drunk,” Ford alleges — corralled her into a bedroom during a gathering of teenagers at a house in Montgomery County.

While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”

Ford said she was able to escape when Kavanaugh’s friend and classmate at Georgetown Preparatory School, Mark Judge, jumped on top of them, sending all three tumbling. She said she ran from the room, briefly locked herself in a bathroom and then fled the house.

[Republican senators rush to Kavanaugh’s defense after sexual misconduct allegation]

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.

Notes from an individual therapy session the following year, when she was being treated for what she says have been long-term effects of the incident, show Ford described a “rape attempt” in her late teens.

In an interview, her husband, Russell Ford, said that in the 2012 sessions, she recounted being trapped in a room with two drunken boys, one of whom pinned her to a bed, molested her and prevented her from screaming. He said he recalled that his wife used Kavanaugh’s last name and voiced concern that Kavanaugh — then a federal judge — might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.

On Sunday, the White House sent The Post a statement Kavanaugh issued last week, when the outlines of Ford’s account became public: “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Through a White House spokesman, Kavanaugh declined to comment further on Ford’s allegation and did not respond to questions about whether he knew her during high school. The White House had no additional comment.

Kavanaugh denies allegations of sexual misconduct
Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh on Sept. 14 denied an allegation of sexual misconduct dating back to when he was a high school student. (Reuters)

Reached by email Sunday, Judge declined to comment. In an interview Friday with The Weekly Standard, before Ford’s name was known, he denied that any such incident occurred. “It’s just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way,” Judge said. He told the New York Times that Kavanaugh was a “brilliant student” who loved sports and was not “into anything crazy or illegal.”

Christine Ford is a professor at Palo Alto University who teaches in a consortium with Stanford University, training graduate students in clinical psychology. Her work has been widely published in academic journals.

She contacted The Post through a tip line in early July, when it had become clear that Kavanaugh was on the shortlist of possible nominees to replace retiring justice Anthony M. Kennedy but before Trump announced his name publicly. A registered Democrat who has made small contributions to political organizations, she contacted her congresswoman, Democrat Anna G. Eshoo, around the same time. In late July, she sent a letter via Eshoo’s office to Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee.

In the letter, which was read to The Post, Ford described the incident and said she expected her story to be kept confidential. She signed the letter as Christine Blasey, the name she uses professionally.

Though Ford had contacted The Post, she declined to speak on the record for weeks as she grappled with concerns about what going public would mean for her and her family — and what she said was her duty as a citizen to tell the story.

She engaged Debra Katz, a Washington lawyer known for her work on sexual harassment cases. On the advice of Katz, who said she believed Ford would be attacked as a liar if she came forward, Ford took a polygraph test administered by a former FBI agent in early August. The results, which Katz provided to The Post, concluded that Ford was being truthful when she said a statement summarizing her allegations was accurate.

By late August, Ford had decided not to come forward, calculating that doing so would upend her life and probably would not affect Kavanaugh’s confirmation. “Why suffer through the annihilation if it’s not going to matter?” she said.

Her story leaked anyway. On Wednesday, the Intercept reported that Feinstein had a letter describing an incident involving Kavanaugh and a woman while they were in high school and that Feinstein was refusing to share it with her Democratic colleagues.

Feinstein soon released a statement: “I have received information from an individual concerning the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court,” she wrote. “That individual strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision. I have, however, referred the matter to federal investigative authorities.”

The FBI redacted Ford’s name and sent the letter to the White House to be included in Kavanaugh’s background file, according to a Judiciary Committee aide. The White House sent it to the Senate Judiciary Committee, making it available to all senators.

As pressure grew, the New York Times reported that the incident involved “possible sexual misconduct.”

By then, Ford had begun to fear she would be exposed. People were clearly learning her identity: A BuzzFeed reporter visited her at her home and tried to speak to her as she was leaving a classroom where she teaches graduate students. Another reporter called her colleagues to ask about her.

On Friday, the New Yorker reported the letter’s contents but did not reveal Ford’s identity. Soon after, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) released a letter from 65 women who say they knew Kavanaugh when he attended high school from 1979 to 1983 at Georgetown Prep, an all-boys school in North Bethesda.

“Through the more than 35 years we have known him, Brett has stood out for his friendship, character, and integrity,” the women wrote. “In particular, he has always treated women with decency and respect. That was true when he was in high school, and it has remained true to this day.”

As the story snowballed, Ford said, she heard people repeating inaccuracies about her and, with the visits from reporters, felt her privacy being chipped away. Her calculation changed.

“These are all the ills that I was trying to avoid,” she said, explaining her decision to come forward. “Now I feel like my civic responsibility is outweighing my anguish and terror about retaliation.”

Katz said she believes Feinstein honored Ford’s request to keep her allegation confidential, but “regrettably others did not.”

“Victims must have the right to decide whether to come forward, especially in a political environment that is as ruthless as this one,” Katz said. “She will now face vicious attacks by those who support this nominee.”

After so many years, Ford said, she does not remember some key details of the incident. She said she believes it occurred in the summer of 1982, when she was 15, around the end of her sophomore year at the all-girls Holton-Arms School in Bethesda. Kavanaugh would have been 17 at the end of his junior year at Georgetown Prep.

At the time, Ford said, she knew Kavanaugh and Judge as “friendly acquaintances” in the private-school social circles of suburban Maryland. Her Holton-Arms friends mostly hung out with boys from the Landon School, she said, but for a period of several months socialized regularly with students from Georgetown Prep.

Ford said she does not remember how the gathering came together the night of the incident. She said she often spent time in the summer at the Columbia Country Club pool in Chevy Chase, where in those pre-cellphone days, teenagers learned about gatherings via word of mouth. She also doesn’t recall who owned the house or how she got there.

Ford said she remembers that it was in Montgomery County, not far from the country club, and that no parents were home at the time. Ford named two other teenagers who she said were at the party. Those individuals did not respond to messages on Sunday morning.

She said she recalls a small family room where she and a handful of others drank beer together that night. She said that each person had one beer but that Kavanaugh and Judge had started drinking earlier and were heavily intoxicated.

In his senior-class yearbook entry at Georgetown Prep, Kavanaugh made several references to drinking, claiming membership to the “Beach Week Ralph Club” and “Keg City Club.” He and Judge are pictured together at the beach in a photo in the yearbook.

Judge is a filmmaker and author who has written for the Daily Caller, the Weekly Standard and The Post. He chronicled his recovery from alcoholism in “Wasted: Tales of a Gen-X Drunk,” which described his own blackout drinking and a culture of partying among students at his high school, renamed in the book “Loyola Prep.” Kavanaugh is not mentioned in the book, but a passage about partying at the beach one summer makes glancing reference to a “Bart O’Kavanaugh,” who “puked in someone’s car the other night” and “passed out on his way back from a party.”

Through the White House, Kavanaugh did not respond to a question about whether the name was a pseudonym for him.

Ford said that on the night of the party, she left the family room to use the bathroom, which was at the top of a narrow stairway. She doesn’t remember whether Kavanaugh and Judge were behind her or already upstairs, but she remembers being pushed into a bedroom and then onto a bed. Rock-and-roll music was playing with the volume turned up high, she said.

She alleges that Kavanaugh — who played football and basketball at Georgetown Prep — held her down with the weight of his body and fumbled with her clothes, seemingly hindered by his intoxication. Judge stood across the room, she said, and both boys were laughing “maniacally.” She said she yelled, hoping that someone downstairs would hear her over the music, and Kavanaugh clapped his hand over her mouth to silence her.

At one point, she said, Judge jumped on top of them, and she tried unsuccessfully to wriggle free. Then Judge jumped on them again, toppling them, and she broke away, she said.

She said she locked herself in the bathroom and listened until she heard the boys “going down the stairs, hitting the walls.” She said that after five or 10 minutes, she unlocked the door and made her way through the living room and outside. She isn’t sure how she got home.

Ford said she has not spoken with Kavanaugh since that night. And she told no one at the time what had happened to her. She was terrified, she said, that she would be in trouble if her parents realized she had been at a party where teenagers were drinking, and she worried they might figure it out even if she did not tell them.

“My biggest fear was, do I look like someone just attacked me?” she said. She said she recalled thinking: “I’m not ever telling anyone this. This is nothing, it didn’t happen, and he didn’t rape me.”

Years later, after going through psychotherapy, Ford said, she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.

“I think it derailed me substantially for four or five years,” she said. She struggled academically and socially, she said, and was unable to have healthy relationships with men. “I was very ill-equipped to forge those kinds of relationships.”

She also said that in the longer term, it contributed to anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms with which she has struggled.

She married her husband in 2002. Early in their relationship, she told him she had been a victim of physical abuse, he said. A decade later, he learned the details of that alleged abuse when the therapist asked her to tell the story, he said.

He said he expects that some people, upon hearing his wife’s account, will believe that Kavanaugh’s high school behavior has no bearing upon his fitness for the nation’s high court. He disagrees.

“I think you look to judges to be the arbiters of right and wrong,” Russell Ford said. “If they don’t have a moral code of their own to determine right from wrong, then that’s a problem. So I think it’s relevant. Supreme Court nominees should be held to a higher standard.”

Beth Reinhard, Seung Min Kim, Alice Crites and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/california-professor-writer-of-confidential-brett-kavanaugh-letter-speaks-out-about-her-allegation-of-sexual-assault/2018/09/16/46982194-b846-11e8-94eb-3bd52dfe917b_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.054d271be045

Doesn't remember exactly when... doesn't remember exactly where... and the "witness" doesn't remember at all. The dems are known to have agreed to pull out all of the stops to obstruct this confirmation. This is just a political ploy.

Tough shit. This is over Thursday.

Let's see how many republicunts are willing to flush there political futures down the toilet by rushing through Kavanaugh.

PkrBum wrote: This is over Thursday.

This is just the Committee hearing, you stupid shit!

It still has to go before the full Senate, you ignorant hillbilly asshole!

Kavanaugh's ass was grassed when it came out she passed the lie detector test. Is Kavanaugh still eager to taker a lie detector test?

Stop Brett Kavanaugh Report: Reasons to Oppose

Judge Kavanaugh sought to undermine access to health care.

Access to health care is a civil and human rights issue of profound importance. Based on his known record and the process by which he was selected, if confirmed to the Supreme Court, there’s every reason to believe that Judge Kavanaugh would vote to overturn and gut critical health care protections.
See Kavanaugh dissents in Seven-Sky v. Holder, Priests for Life v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and Sissel v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Judge Kavanaugh is hostile to reproductive freedom.

Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated his hostility to reproductive freedom both on and off the bench. He most certainly passed President Trump’s Roe v. Wade litmus test.
See Kavanaugh ruling in Garza v. Hargan, his 2017 speech to the conservative American Enterprise Institute, and a recent op-ed from former law clerk Sarah Pitlyk.

Judge Kavanaugh has restricted voting rights.

In two voting rights cases, Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated his lack of commitment to racial justice.
See Kavanaugh ruling in South Carolina v. United States, Kavanaugh-Bork-Clegg amicus brief in Rice v. Cayetano, and his op-ed and interview on Cayetano.

Judge Kavanaugh is dismissive of discrimination claims.

Judge Kavanaugh’s ideological bias can also be seen in employment discrimination cases where he has dissented and voted to dismiss claims that a majority of his D.C. Circuit colleagues found to be meritorious.
See Kavanaugh dissents in Howard v. Office of the Chief Administrative Officer of the U.S. House of Representatives, Miller v. Clinton, and Rattigan v. Holder.

Judge Kavanaugh is hostile to workers’ rights.

Judge Kavanaugh also has a pattern of ruling against workers and employees in other types of workplace cases, including workplace safety, worker privacy, and union disputes.
See Kavanaugh dissents in SeaWorld of Fla., LLC v. Perez, National Labor Relations Board v. CNN America, Inc., and National Federation of Federal Employees v. Vilsack, as well as Kavanaugh ruling in American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO v. Gates.

Judge Kavanaugh holds anti-immigrant views.

Including his ruling in Garza v. Hargan, involving women’s reproductive freedom, Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated hostility to the rights of immigrants. He was described by a Breitbart writer as someone with an “America First” approach who would “share President Trump’s views on immigration.”
See Kavanaugh dissents in AgriProcessor v. National Labor Relations Board and Fogo de Chao Inc. v. Department of Homeland Security.

Judge Kavanaugh holds troubling views on presidential power.

As commentator Simon Lazarus has observed: “If President Donald Trump wished to replace retired Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy with a successor likely to back the White House in any Russia investigation showdown with Special Counsel Robert Mueller, or, more broadly, to legitimate Trump’s penchant for sabotaging laws he disfavors, he could not have done better than nominate Brett Kavanaugh.”
Indeed, Judge Kavanaugh has expressed extreme and disturbing views about presidential power.
See Kavanaugh in Minnesota Law Review, Georgetown Law Journal, and 1998 panel discussion. See also Kavanaugh ruling in PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and Kavanaugh’s role in the Bush administration’s deeply flawed detention and interrogation policies.

Judge Kavanaugh has undermined environmental protections.

During his 12 years on the bench, Judge Kavanaugh has consistently ruled to protect polluters rather than the environment. He has opposed critical environmental protections for clean air and clean water, repeatedly ruling that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) exceeded its statutory authority in issuing rules to limit pollutants.
See Kavanaugh rulings in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA and Mexichem Fluor Inc. v. EPA, as well as Kavanaugh dissent in Howmet Corp. v. EPA.
Moreover, Judge Kavanaugh has advanced an anti-environment view of the Chevrondoctrine. For more than three decades, Supreme Court precedent has required judges to defer to administrative agencies’ interpretations of federal law in most cases where the law is “ambiguous” and the agency’s position is “reasonable.” Judge Kavanaugh’s clear intent to overturn this precedent and its progeny would impede the ability of federal agencies like the EPA to carry out their vital missions.
See Kavanaugh in Notre Dame Law Review and Harvard Law Review.

Judge Kavanaugh opposes commonsense gun safety laws.

During the 2016 campaign, President Trump stated: “I’m very proud to have the endorsement of the NRA and it was the earliest endorsement they’ve ever given to anybody who ran for president…. We are going to appoint justices that will feel very strongly about the Second Amendment.”
Judge Kavanaugh clearly passes this litmus test. He dissented in Heller v. District of Columbia before it got to the Supreme Court and would have held that the D.C. ban on assault weapons was unconstitutional.

Judge Kavanaugh has a pro-government bias in criminal cases.

Judge Kavanaugh reflexively rules for the government in criminal cases. Out of his twelve dissents in criminal and law enforcement cases, Judge Kavanaugh ruled for the government in 10 of those cases, including United States v. Askew and Roth v. U.S. Department of Justice.

Judge Kavanaugh holds troubling views on money in politics.

Judge Kavanaugh’s judicial record indicates he would vote with the conservative bloc on the Supreme Court to continue opening the floodgates of money into our political system. If confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh would certainly be more aggressive than Justice Kennedy in lifting restrictions on big money, including EMILY’s List v. Federal Election Commission and Independence Institute v. Federal Election Commission.

Judge Kavanaugh sought to undermine Church-State separation in education.

As an attorney in private practice, Judge Kavanaugh was part of the legal team representing former Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s effort to create the Opportunity Scholarships Program. Notably, participating voucher students attending private schools would not have had the same civil rights, including their right to services as a child with a disability, as public school students. In 2006, the Florida Supreme Court struck down the program.
See also GOP Congress amicus brief, authored by Kavanaugh, in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe.

Judge Kavanaugh held many ideological jobs and affiliations prior to becoming a judge.

Judge Kavanaugh’s right-wing ideology is reflected not only in his judicial record but also in his earlier career as a partisan lawyer.
After clerking for Third Circuit Judge Walter Stapleton, Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, and Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, he worked for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr on the Clinton investigations; at the Washington, D.C. law firm Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, where he represented corporate clients and Republican causes and politicians; as the Mid-Atlantic regional coordinator for the Bush-Cheney campaign; and in Florida observing the recount as part of the Bush v. Gore
Kavanaugh was then rewarded with plum White House positions: from 2001 to 2003 serving as associate counsel and from 2003 to 2006 serving as assistant to the president and staff secretary. In these positions, he worked on the nominations of several contentious judicial nominees before he himself was nominated to the D.C. Circuit. He also worked on many policy issues.
Kavanaugh is also a longtime member of the Federalist Society.

Judge Kavanaugh has ties to Judge Alex Kozinski.

With workplace harassment and sexual harassment holding national attention, senators must ask Judge Kavanaugh what he knew about Judge Alex Kozinski’s predatory and abusive behavior, when he learned of it, and what actions he took in response. He has reportedly remained a close associate and friend of Judge Kozinski since his 1991-1992 clerkship.

Source: http://www.pfaw.org/blog-posts/more-than-100-civil-and-human-rights-organizations-oppose-scotus-nominee-brett-kavanaugh/

See also: http://www.pfaw.org/campaign/protecting-the-supreme-court/toolkit-stop-brett-kavanaugh/



http://www.pfaw.org/campaign/protecting-the-supreme-court/tool-kit-for-activists-stop-brett-kavanaugh/stop-brett-kavanaugh-report-reasons-to-oppose/

A political ploy. She's not sure when... she's not sure where... and she didn't say a word for decades. She’s an anti-Trump activist professor whose parents had their house foreclosed by Kavanaugh’s mom.

She can't even produce a witness of any kind. In fact... the one witness she claimed repudiated her.

Leftists might delay his confirmation by a few days. Congratulations comrades.

Sorry, this is stupid. I will grant all her allegations as being true, and the simple reality is NO prosecutor would have even brought charges for a drunk party where someone alleges what she alleges......the boys would show up and testify to the jury and this case would have been dismissed, yet someone thinks this is proper........sorry, somebody pinch the Democrats because they are talking with the white rabbit.

Floridatexan wrote:Stop Brett Kavanaugh Report: Reasons to Oppose

etc etc

Source: http://www.pfaw.org/blog-posts/more-than-100-civil-and-human-rights-organizations-oppose-scotus-nominee-brett-kavanaugh/

So what your article is really saying is Democrats oppose Kavanaugh on grounds of political ideology rather than on grounds of his suitability and qualifications in terms of knowledge of the law and experience as a judge.

Thank you for telling the truth.  And sorry, but "elections have consequences", you know.  

So why should we all have to sit through this whole smear campaign of she-said he-said drama that will never lead to any definitive conclusion about an alleged teenage groping incident that supposedly happened thirty five years ago in high school?  An allegation made by an obviously loony leftist liberal California college professor with documented mental health problems.  

Enough of this nonsense! Let Kavanaugh's actual verifiable record speak for itself and let the Senate vote already!

Congrats Clarence Thomas, you're a confirmation vote away from no longer being the creepiest guy on SCOTUS. - Eric Brans


If Susan Collins supports Kavanaugh I assume she will lead the campaign to return Al Franken to the Senate. - Andy Borowitz


GOP platform for 2020:No healthcare, but everyone gets one free rape.- Randi Mayem Singer



"But what about Bill Clinton?"

Well, Pepe, I'm glad you asked me that. Bill Clinton was 20 years ago. If Bill Clinton were in office today, his own party would be forcing him to resign in disgrace. Times have changed, Pepe, and maybe it's time for you to change along with them. - Jeff Tiedrich