NAFALAW.COM is honored to present our brief with our total support for our 2020 “Thurgood Marshall” Award nominee- Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh.
Brett Kavanaugh
Preamble:
“Honor to honor.” This National Association for Attorneys, NAFALAW.COM is honored to present our brief with our total support for our 2020 “Thurgood Marshall” Award nominee- Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh.
The word honor derives from the Latin honorare or honoris that specifically indicates public glorification through the exercise of public office. In this sense, it is associated with pride in the social relevance it means. Hence the term “a lot of honor.” For this reason, it is an honor for us at NAFALAW to have as our nominee the Honorable Justice Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh in the United States Supreme Court. It is our way of showing support, respect and consideration towards our support of our 2020 “Thurgood Marshall” nominee.
“The Bible tells us in one of the ten commandments that we must honor our parents at all times.” We added, to honoring our citizens role models. In ancient Rome, during the celebration of the games, they honored said role models and were totally forbidden disputes.
TO:
A.B.A. Civil Rights and Social Justice – AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
FROM:
“N.A.F.A.”National Association for Foreign Attorneys” Florida USA. Presenting this its 2020 Thurgood Marshall Award Nominations in favor of Honorable Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh.
In compliance with the requirements attached hereto please find the following:
NAFALAW.COM files this RESUME is support of the nomination of Honorable Judge Brett Michael Kavanaugh, our nominee.
This package includes a photograph, resume type curriculum vitae, describing the following:
The nominee’s professional background;
The nominee’s educational background;
The nominee’s principal areas of practice, including the number of years of practice; and
The nominee’s professional achievements.
Our nominee- Honorable Brett Michael Kavanaugh; born February 12, 1965) is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He was nominated by President Donald Trump to succeed Anthony Kennedy and took the oath of office on October 6, 2018. He previously served as a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and as a staff lawyer for various offices of the federal government.
Judge Kavanaugh graduated from Yale University, where he joined Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity. After graduating from Yale Law School, he began his career as a law clerk and then a postgraduate fellow working under Judge Ken Starr. After Starr left the D.C. Circuit to take the position as head of the Office of Independent Counsel, Kavanaugh followed and assisted him with various investigations concerning President Bill Clinton, including the drafting of the Starr Report, which urged Clinton’s impeachment.
After the 2000 U.S. presidential election (in which he worked for the George W. Bush campaign in the Florida recount), he joined the administration as White House Staff Secretary and was a central figure in its efforts to identify and confirm judicial nominees.
Judge Kavanaugh was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by President Bush in 2003. His confirmation hearings were contentious; they stalled for three years over charges of partisanship. He was ultimately confirmed to the D.C. Circuit in May 2006 after a series of negotiations between Democratic and Republican U.S. Senators. An evaluation of Kavanaugh’s appellate court decisions in four separate public policy areas was performed by two law professors for the Washington Post. It found he had the most conservative overall voting record on the D.C. Court between 2003 and 2018.
President Donald J. Trump nominated Judge Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court on July 9, 2018, to fill the position vacated by retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy.
When Kavanaugh’s name was on the short list of Supreme Court nominees and before his nomination, Palo Alto University Professor of Psychology Christine Blasey Ford contacted a Washington Post tip line with accusations that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her in the early 1980s while the two were in high school.
Two other women also accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.
Judge Kavanaugh denied all three accusations. The Senate Judiciary Committee held a supplemental hearing over Ford’s allegations, after which it voted to advance the confirmation to a full Senate vote. After delaying the vote for an additional FBI investigation, the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh’s nomination by a vote of 50–48 on October 6, 2018.
Judge Kavanaugh was born on February 12, 1965, in Washington, D.C., the son of Martha Gamble (née Murphy) and Everett Edward Kavanaugh Jr. He is of Irish Catholic descent on both sides of his family. His paternal great-grandfather immigrated to the United States in the late 19th century from Roscommon, Ireland, and his maternal Irish lineage goes back to his great-great-grandparents settling in New Jersey. Judge Kavanaugh’s father was a lawyer and served as the president of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association for two decades.
His mother was a history teacher Woodson and McKinley high schools in Washington in the 1960s and 1970s. She later earned a law degree from American University in 1978 and served from 1995 to 2001 as a Maryland Circuit Court judge in Montgomery County, Maryland.
Judge Kavanaugh was raised in Bethesda, Maryland. As a teenager, he attended Georgetown Preparatory School, a Jesuit boys college prep school, where he was two years ahead of future U.S. Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.
He was captain of the basketball team and was a wide receiver and cornerback on the football team. Judg Kavanaugh was also friends with classmate Mark Judge; both were in the same class with Maryland State Senator Richard Madaleno.
After graduating from Georgetown Prep in 1983, Kavanaugh went to Yale University, as had his paternal grandfather. Several of Kavanaugh’s Yale classmates remembered him as a “serious but not showy student” who loved sports, especially basketball. He unsuccessfully tried out for the Yale Bulldogs men’s basketball team and later played for two years on the junior varsity team. He wrote articles about basketball and other sports for the Yale Daily News, and was a member of the fraternity Delta Kappa Epsilon. He graduated from Yale in 1987 with a Bachelor of Arts cum laude in history. In October 2018, it was reported that Kavanaugh and Chris Dudley were in a bar fight in September 1985 after Kavanaugh threw ice at a man who looked like Ali Campbell of UB40.
Judge Kavanaugh then attended Yale Law School, where he lived in a group house with future judge James E. Boasberg and played basketball with professor George L. Priest (sponsor of the school’s Federalist Society). He was a member of the Yale Law Journal and served as a notes editor during his third year. Kavanaugh graduated from Yale Law with a Juris Doctor degree in 1990.
Legal career (1990–2006), Judge Kavanaugh (second from left) with President George W. Bush and White House staffers
Clerkships Judge Kavanaugh first worked as a law clerk for Judge Walter King Stapleton of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. During Kavanaugh’s clerkship, Stapleton wrote the majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which the Third Circuit upheld many of Pennsylvania’s abortion restrictions. George Priest recommended Kavanaugh to Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, who was regarded as a feeder judge. After clerking for Kozinski, Kavanaugh next interviewed for a clerkship with Chief Justice William Rehnquist on the U.S. Supreme Court, but was not offered a clerkship.
In 1992, Judge Kavanaugh earned a one-year fellowship with the Solicitor General of the United States, Ken Starr. Also in 1992, he worked as a summer associate for Munger, Tolles & Olson. He clerked for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy from 1993–1994, working alongside fellow high school alumnus Neil Gorsuch and with future-Judge Gary Feinerman. Ken Starr associate counsel.
After his Supreme Court clerkship, Judge Kavanaugh again worked for Ken Starr until 1997 as an Associate Counsel in the Office of the Independent Counsel with colleagues Rod Rosenstein and Alex Azar. In that capacity, he reopened an investigation into the 1993 gunshot death of Vincent Foster. After three years, the investigation concluded that Foster had committed suicide. In an op-ed, Princeton University history professor Sean Wilentz criticized Kavanaugh for investing federal money and other resources into investigating partisan conspiracy theories surrounding the cause of Foster’s death.
After working in private practice in 1997–1998, he rejoined Starr as an Associate Counselor in 1998. In Swidler & Berlin v. United States (1998), Kavanaugh argued his first and only case before the Supreme Court. Arguing for Starr’s office, Kavanaugh asked the court to disregard attorney-client privilege in relation to the investigation of Foster’s death. The court rejected Kavanaugh’s arguments by a vote of 6–3.
Judge Kavanaugh was a principal author of the Starr Report to Congress, released in September 1998, on the Bill Clinton–Monica Lewinsky sex scandal; the report argued on broad grounds for Clinton’s impeachment. Judge Kavanaugh had urged Starr to ask Clinton sexually graphic questions, and described Clinton as being involved in “a conspiracy to obstruct justice”, having “disgraced his office” and “lied to the American people”.
The report provided extensive and explicit descriptions of each of the President’s sexual encounters with Lewinsky, a level of detail which the authors described as “essential” to the case against Clinton.
In December 2000, Judge Kavanaugh joined the legal team of George W. Bush, which was trying to stop the ballot recount in Florida. After Bush became president in January 2001, Kavanaugh was hired as an associate by the White House Counsel, Alberto Gonzales. There, Kavanaugh worked on the Enron scandal, the successful nomination of Chief Justice John Roberts, and the unsuccessful nomination of Miguel Estrada. Starting in July 2003, he served as Assistant to the President and White House Staff Secretary, succeeding Harriet Miers. In that position he was responsible for coordinating all documents going to and from the president.
Private practice From 1997 to 1998, Kavanaugh was a partner at the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis. In 1999, Kavanaugh rejoined the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis as a partner. While there in 2000, he was pro bono counsel of record for relatives of Elián González, a six-year-old rescued Cuban boy. After the boy’s mother’s death at sea, relatives in the U.S. wanted to keep him from returning to the care of his sole surviving parent, his father in Cuba. Kavanaugh was among a series of lawyers who unsuccessfully sought to stop efforts to repatriate Gonzalez to Cuba.
The district court, Circuit Court and Supreme Court all followed precedent, refusing to block the boy’s return to his home.
While Judge Kavanaugh was at Kirkland & Ellis, he authored two amicus briefs to the Supreme Court that supported religious activities and expressions in public places. The first, in 2000, in Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, argued that a student speaker at football games voted for by a majority of students should be treated as private speech in a limited public forum; the second, in Good News Club v. Milford Central School, argued that a Christian Bible instruction program should have the same after-school access to school facilities as other non-curriculum-related student groups.
Judge Kavanaugh has been a member of the Federalist Society since 1988. In the administration of George W. Bush, he held a key position that involved judicial appointments. Bush judicial nominees who were Federalist Society members included John Roberts and Samuel Alito, both appointed to the Supreme Court, and about half of the judges appointed to the courts of appeals.
U.S. Circuit Judge (2006–2018). Judge Kavanaugh is sworn into the D.C. Circuit by Justice Anthony Kennedy as his wife holds the bible and President Bush looks on, 2006. Coincidentally, Kavanaugh would be sworn into the U.S. Supreme Court 12 years later as Kennedy’s replacement.
President George W. Bush nominated Judge Kavanaugh to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on July 25, 2003, but his nomination stalled in the Senate for nearly three years. Democratic senators accused him of being too partisan, with Senator Dick Durbin calling him the “Forrest Gump of Republican politics”. In 2003, the American Bar Association had rated Kavanaugh as “well qualified” (its highest category), but, after doing dozens more interviews in 2006, downgraded him to “qualified”.
The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended he be confirmed on a 10–8 party-line vote on May 11, 2006, and he was confirmed by the Senate on May 26 by a vote of 57–36. Judge Kavanaugh was sworn in on June 1. He was the fourth judge nominated to the D.C. Circuit by Bush and confirmed. Kavanaugh began hearing cases on September 11 and had his formal investiture on September 27.
In July 2007, Senators Patrick Leahy and Dick Durbin accused Kavanaugh of lying to the Judiciary Committee when he denied being involved in formulating the Bush administration’s detention and interrogation policies. In 2002, Kavanaugh had told other White House lawyers that he believed Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy would not approve of denying legal counsel to prisoners detained as enemy combatants. The issue re-emerged in July 2018 after Kavanaugh was nominated to the Supreme Court.
Notable cases. When Judge Kavanaugh has written an opinion and the case has been considered by the Supreme Court, that court has adopted his position thirteen times while reversing his position only once. These included cases involving environmental regulations, criminal procedure, the separation of powers and extraterritorial jurisdiction in human rights abuse cases. He has been regarded as a feeder judge.
In the October 2017 Garza v. Hargan decision, Kavanaugh joined an unsigned, divided-panel of the D.C. Circuit in holding that the Office of Refugee Resettlement does not violate an unaccompanied alien minor’s constitutional right to an abortion by requiring that she first be appointed a sponsor before travelling to obtain the abortion, provided “the process of securing a sponsor to whom the minor is released occurs expeditiously.”
Days later, the en banc D.C. Circuit reversed that judgment, with Judge Kavanaugh dissenting. In his dissent, Kavanaugh criticized the majority for creating “a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand”. The girl then obtained an abortion. In 2018, in a follow-up petition from the Solicitor General of the United States, the en banc D.C. Circuit’s judgment was vacated by the U.S. Supreme Court and the girl’s claim was ultimately dismissed as moot. Thus it does not serve as precedent.
In November 2011, Kavanaugh dissented when the D.C. Circuit upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction in the case. In his dissent concerning jurisdiction, he compared the individual mandate to a tax. After a unanimous panel found that the ACA did not violate the Constitution’s Origination Clause in Sissel v. United States Department of Health & Human Services (2014), Judge Kavanaugh wrote a lengthy dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc. In May 2015, Kavanaugh dissented from a decision that denied an en banc rehearing of the Priests for Life v. HHS ruling in which the panel upheld the ACA’s contraceptive mandate accommodations against Priests for Life’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act claims.
In Zubik v. Burwell (2016), the Supreme Court vacated the circuit’s judgment in a per curiam decision.
Appointments Clause and separation of powers. In August 2008, Kavanaugh dissented when the D.C. Circuit found that the Constitution’s Appointments Clause did not prevent the Sarbanes–Oxley Act from creating a board whose members were not directly removable by the President. In Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversigh Board (2010), the Supreme Court reversed the circuit court’s judgment by a vote of 5–4.
In 2015, Judge Kavanaugh found that those directly regulated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) could challenge the constitutionality of its design. In October 2016, Kavanaugh wrote for a divided panel finding that the CFPB’s design was unconstitutional, and made the CFPB Director removable by the President of the United States.
In January 2018, the en banc D.C. Circuit reversed that judgment by a vote of 7–3, over the dissent of Kavanaugh.
In 2013, Kavanaugh issued an extraordinary writ of mandamus requiring the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to process the license application of the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, over the dissent of Judge Merrick Garland. In April 2014, Kavanaugh dissented when the court found that Labor Secretary Tom Perez could issue workplace safety citations against SeaWorld regarding the multiple killings of its workers by Tilikum the orca.
After Judge Kavanaugh wrote for a divided panel striking down a Clean Air Act regulation, the Supreme Court reversed by a vote of 6–2 in EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. (2014).
Judge Kavanaugh dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc of a unanimous panel opinion upholding the agency’s regulation of greenhouse gas emissions and a fractured Supreme Court reversed by a vote of 5–4 in Utility Air Regulatory Group, v. Enviromental Protection Agency (2014). After Judge Kavanaugh dissented from a per curiam decision allowing the agency to disregard cost–benefit analysis, the Supreme Court reversed by a vote of 5–4 in Michigan v. EPA (2015).
In Doe v. Exxon Mobil Corp. (2007), Kavanaugh dissented when the circuit court allowed a lawsuit making accusations of ExxonMobil human rights violations in Indonesia to proceed, arguing in his dissent that the claims were not justiciable. Judge Kavanaugh dissented again when the circuit court later found that the corporation could be sued under the Alien Tort Statute of 1789.
First Amendment and free speech Judge Kavanaugh wrote for unanimous three-judge district courts when they held that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act could restrict soft money donations to political parties and could forbid campaign contributions by foreign citizens. Those judgments were both summarily affirmed on direct appeal by the Supreme Court.
In 2014, Judge Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment when the en banc D.C. Circuit found that the Free Speech Clause did not forbid the government from requiring meatpackers to include a country of origin label on their products. In United States Telecom Ass’n v. FCC (2016), Kavanaugh dissented when the en banc circuit refused to rehear a rejected challenge to the net neutrality rule, writing, “Congress did not clearly authorize the FCC to issue the net neutrality rule”.
In November 2010, Judge Kavanaugh dissented from the denial of rehearing en banc after the circuit found that attaching a Global Positioning System tracking device to a vehicle violated the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The circuit’s judgment was then affirmed by the Supreme Court in United States v. Jones (2012). In February 2016, Kavanaugh dissented when the en banc circuit refused to rehear police officers’ rejected claims of qualified immunity for arresting partygoers in a vacant house. In District of Columbia v. Wesby (2018), the Supreme Court unanimously reversed the circuit’s judgment.
In Klayman v. Obama (2015), Kavanaugh concurred when the circuit court denied an en banc rehearing of its decision to vacate a district court order blocking the National Security Agency’s warrantless bulk collection of telephony metadata. In his concurrence, Kavanaugh wrote that the metadata collection was not a search, and, even if it were, no reasonable suspicion would be required because of the government’s special need to prevent terrorist attacks.
Judge Kavanaugh holds his daughter while greeting British Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George W. Bush.
In April 2009, Kavanaugh wrote a lengthy concurrence when the court found that detainees at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp had no right to advanced notice before being transferred to another country.
In Kiyemba v. Obama (2010), the Supreme Court vacated that judgment while refusing to review the matter. In June 2010, Kavanaugh wrote a concurrence in judgment when the en banc D.C. Circuit found that the Al-Shifa pharmaceutical factory owners could not bring a defamation suit regarding the government’s allegations that they were terrorists. In October 2012, he wrote for a unanimous court when it found that the Constitution’s Ex Post Facto Clause made it unlawful for the government to prosecute Salim Hamdan under the Military Commissions Act of 2006 on charges of providing material support for terrorism.
In August 2010, Judge Kavanaugh wrote a lengthy concurrence when the en banc circuit refused to rehear Ghaleb Nassar Al Bihani’s rejected claims that the international law of war limits the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists. In 2014, Kavanaugh concurred in the judgment when the en banc circuit found that Ali al-Bahlul could be retroactively convicted of war crimes, provided existing statute already made it a crime “because it does not alter the definition of the crime, the defenses or the punishment”. In October 2016, Judge Kavanaugh wrote the plurality opinion when the en banc circuit found al-Bahlul could be convicted by a military commission even if his offenses are not internationally recognized as war crimes under the law of war.
In Meshal v. Higgenbotham (2016), Kavanaugh concurred when the divided panel threw out a claim by an American that he had been disappeared by the FBI in a Kenyan black site.
Second Amendment and gun ownership. In October 2011, Kavanaugh dissented when the circuit court found that a ban on the sale of semi-automatic rifles was permissible under the Second Amendment. This case followed the landmark Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008).
Twenty-five of Kavanaugh’s forty-eight law clerks have been women, and thirteen have been people of color. A number have been children of other judges and high-profile legal figures, including Clayton Kozinski (son of former federal Judge Alex Kozinski), Porter Wilkinson (daughter of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III), Philip Alito (son of Justice Samuel Alito), Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld (daughter of Yale Law Professor Amy Chua), and Emily Chertoff (daughter of former DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff).
On September 20, 2018, The Guardian reported that two Yale professors had advised female law students at Yale that their physical attractiveness and femininity could play a role in securing a clerkship with Kavanaugh. Chua was reported by unnamed sources as having stated that female applicants should exude “model-like” femininity and “dress outgoing” in their job interview with Kavanaugh. Responding to the report, Chua denied that Kavanaugh’s hiring decisions were affected by female applicants’ attractiveness, stating, “Judge Kavanaugh’s first and only litmus test in hiring has been excellence.”
Jed Rubenfeld stated that Kavanaugh “hires women with a certain look”, although the source stated, Rubenfeld did not say what that look was. Yale Law School Dean Heather Gerken called the allegations “of enormous concern to me and the school”, which she said is investigating the matter.
Nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States
On July 2, 2018, Kavanaugh was one of four U.S. Court of Appeals judges to receive a personal 45-minute interview by President Donald J. Trump as a potential replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy.
On July 9, Trump nominated Kavanaugh for a seat on the Supreme Court. In his first public speech after the nomination, Kavanaugh said, “No president has ever consulted more widely or talked with more people from more backgrounds to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination.”
A statistical analysis by The Washington Post estimated that Kavanaugh was more conservative than Neil Gorsuch and less conservative than Samuel Alito. Jonathan Turley of George Washington University has stated that among the judges considered by Trump, “Kavanaugh has the most robust view of presidential powers and immunities”. Brian Bennett writing for Time magazine cites Kavanaugh’s 2009 Minnesota Law Review article as defending the privilege of the President to immunity from prosecution during tenure in office. In a 2017 speech at the American Enterprise Institute about former Chief Justice, William Rehnquist, he praised his opinions in Roe v. Wade and Furman v. Georgia, where Rehnquist dissented in rulings that overturned the ban against abortion and the statutes which supported the death penalty.
An evaluation of Judge Kavanaugh’s appellate court decisions was performed by two law professors for the Washington Post, They rated his decisions in four areas: rights of criminal defendants; support for rules regarding stricter enforcement of environmental protection; upholding the rights of labor unions; and siding with those bringing suits alleging discrimination. They found he had the most conservative voting record on the D.C. Court in three of those policy areas, and the second-most in the fourth, between 2003 and 2018.
During his hearing, Kavanaugh said that he had repeatedly described the four greatest moments in Supreme Court history as being the cases Brown v. Board of Education, Marbury v. Madison, Youngstown Steel, and United States v. Nixon, with Brown being the single greatest.
According to the Judicial Common Space scores, a score based on the ideology scores of the home state senators and the president who nominated the judge to the federal bench, Clarence Thomas is the only justice more conservative than Kavanaugh. According to this metric, Kavanaugh’s confirmation would mean the composition of the court would shift to the right. Had Merrick Garland been confirmed, Stephen Breyer would have become the median swing vote when Justice Kennedy retired. However, since Scalia was replaced by another conservative (Gorsuch), it was expected that Chief Justice John Roberts would become the median swing vote on the Supreme Court upon Kavanaugh’s confirmation.
Senate Judiciary Committee public hearings. The Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled three or four days of public hearings on Kavanaugh’s nomination, commencing on September 4, 2018. The hearings were at the onset delayed with objections from the Democratic members, concerning the absence of records during the nominee’s time in the George W. Bush administration, prior to his service as a federal circuit court judge. The Democrats also complained that 42,000 pages of documents had been received at the 11th hour, the night before the first day of hearings.
Repeated statements from the Republicans included the assertion that the volume of documents available on this nominee equaled that of the previous five nominees for the court; the Democrats responded with their repeated contention that only 15% of demanded documents about the nominee had been obtained. Numerous motions by the Democrats to adjourn or suspend the hearings were ruled to be out of order by Chairman Chuck Grassley, who argued that Judge Kavanaugh had written over 300 legal opinions available for review. The first day’s session closed after statements from each senator and the nominee, with question and answer periods to begin the following day.
During the first round of questions from senators on September 5, 2018, Kavanaugh held to his earlier stated position that he would not express an opinion on matters that might come before the court. He thus refused to promise to recuse himself from any case, including any that might involve President Trump. He also declined to comment on coverage of pre-existing healthcare conditions, semiautomatic rifle possession, the precedent of Roe v. Wade, or the President’s power to issue a self-pardon. The nominee was given the opportunity and expounded at length upon various Constitutional amendments, stare decisis (the role of legal precedent in shaping subsequent judicial rulings), and the President’s power to dismiss federal employees. As in the prior session, there were frequent outbursts of protest in the audience, requiring security intervention and removal, as well as repeated procedural objections from Democrats.
The Committee’s third day of hearings began with a furor over the release of emails of Judge Kavanaugh that related to concern about potential racial profiling in security screenings. The day continued with Kavanaugh’s attempts to articulate his jurisprudence, including refusing direct questions to opine on matters that he characterized as hypothetical. Senator Chris Coons had tendered Judge Kavanaugh written questions about any knowledge of inappropriate behavior on the part of judge Alex Kozinski, for whom Kavanaugh had clerked for, including his circulations of sexually explicit emails via his “Easy Rider Gag List”. According to The Intercept, though Coons had asked him to review his emails from the judge, Kavanaugh instead replied: “I do not remember”.
Some time during his testimony, Judge Kavanaugh stated that the 2017 exposure of his mentor, judge Alex Kozinski, as an alleged prolific sexual harasser, was a surprising “gut punch”.The Guardian reported that their sources disputed Kavanaugh’s account because Kozinski’s alleged behavior was reportedly widely known among those in the judiciary system and its exposure culminated in his abrupt resignation from the bench.
The Committee released a 2003 email in which Kavanaugh said, “I am not sure that all legal scholars refer to [Roe v. Wade] as the settled law of the land at the Supreme Court level since Court can always overrule its precedent, and three current Justices on the Court would do so.” Judge Kavanaugh stressed that he was commenting on the views of legal scholars at the time, not his own views, and noted that the case had been reaffirmed on a number of occasions since the time of the statement.
Sen. Susan Collins, a key but undeclared vote in the confirmation, indicated the statement did not contradict Kavanaugh’s personal assurance to her that Roe is settled law. Judge Kavanaugh noted that Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which reaffirmed Roe v. Wade, was “precedent on precedent”. According to Kavanaugh, Casey is a key decision about when the Court’s precedent may be overturned.
On September 27, the Committee held an additional day of public hearings to discuss allegations that Kavanaugh engaged in sexual misconduct while in high school. The only witnesses were Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, who had accused him.
Republican members of the committee did not question Ford directly; questioning on their behalf was done by Rachel Mitchell, a career prosecutor from Maricopa County, Arizona. Her questioning of Kavanaugh was cut short by Grassley, after which the Republican members of the committee questioned him themselves.
Alternating with their questions, Democratic members of the committee questioned Ford and Judge Kavanaugh themselves. Ford repeated and expanded upon her earlier allegations, saying that Kavanaugh and Judge, both “visibly drunk”, had locked her into a bedroom, where Kavanaugh groped her and tried to take off her clothes while Judge watched. She said she “believed he was going to rape me” and feared for her life when he held his hand over her mouth.
In his opening statement, Judge Kavanaugh claimed the accusations were a “political hit” by left-wing activists and Democrats, saying he faced retaliation “on behalf of the Clintons” for his work on the Starr Report against Bill Clinton. Leland Keyser, Ford’s friend who Ford said was present during the alleged attack has denied that such an event took place, and questioned certain aspects of the story. Keyser also stated she felt pressured by people to support Ford’s story, something she told the FBI about.
In response to his testimony, more than 2400 law professors signed a letter saying that the Senate should not confirm him because “he did not display the impartiality and judicial temperament requisite to sit on the highest court of our land.”
At the conclusion of the hearing the Republican leadership of the committee indicated that they planned to hold a committee vote on the nomination the next day, September 28, with a procedural vote on the Senate floor on September 29.
On September 28, the committee voted along party lines to advance the nomination to the full Senate; Senator Jeff Flake’s vote in support was conditioned on the vote in the full Senate being delayed for a week to allow investigation of the current claims by the FBI. Later, Senators Joe Manchin and Lisa Murkowski also said they would not vote to confirm without an FBI investigation.
On this request from the Judiciary Committee, Trump ordered a “supplemental investigation to update Judge Kavanaugh’s file”, to be limited in scope and completed within one week.
The report was transmitted to the White House on October 3 and from there to the Senate on October 4, where Senators were permitted one at a time to review the report in secrecy. Majority Leader McConnell said the Senate would vote on the confirmation on October 6. Democrats criticized the FBI investigation as incomplete, a “farce”, a “sham” and “a horrific cover-up” that omitted key witnesses at the White House’s direction.
According to The Washington Post, the White House stopped the FBI from investigating possible falsehoods in Kavanaugh’s testimony to Congress about his drinking habits during his youth.
Eighty-three ethics complaints were brought against Judge Kavanaugh in regard to his conduct during his U.S. Supreme Court confirmation hearings. Chief Justice John Roberts appointed a special federal panel of judges to investigate the complaints. In December 2018, the judicial panel dismissed all 83 ethics complaints, concluding that while the complaints “are serious,” there is no existing authority that allows lower court judges to investigate or discipline Supreme Court justices.
On October 5, the Senate voted 51–49 to invoke cloture, advancing the nomination to a final floor vote expected on October 6. This was enabled through the application of the so-called “nuclear option”, or a simple majority vote, rather than the historical three-fifths super majority in place before April 2017.
The vote was along party lines, with the exception of Democrat Joe Manchin voting yes and Republican Lisa Murkowski voting no.
On October 6, the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court with a 50–48 vote. One senator, Republican Steve Daines, who supported the nomination, was absent during the vote due to his attendance at the wedding of his daughter that day, and Murkowski voted “present” despite her opposition, so that their two votes would be canceled out and the balance of the vote would be retained – a rarely used traditional courtesy known as a “pair between senators”.
All Republicans except Daines and Murkowski voted to approve the nomination, and all Democrats voted in opposition, except Joe Manchin who voted to approve the nomination.
Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote was historically close. In terms of actual votes, the only Supreme Court confirmation vote that was closer was the vote on Stanley Matthews, nominated by President James A. Garfield in 1881. Matthews was confirmed by the margin of a single vote, 24-23; no other justice has been confirmed by a single vote.
However, in percentage terms, Judge Kavanaugh’s vote was even closer than Matthews’. Matthews was supported by 51.06% of the senators voting, but Kavanaugh only got 51.02% of the vote.
Judge Justice Brett Michael Kavanaugh was sworn in as the 114th Justice of the Supreme Court on the evening of October 6, 2018.
The Constitutional Oath was administered by Chief Justice Roberts and the Judicial Oath was administered by retired Associate Justice Kennedy, whom Kavanaugh succeeded on the Court. This private ceremony was followed by a public ceremony at the White House on October 8.
Upon joining the court, Kavanaugh became the first Supreme Court justice to hire an all-female team of law clerks.
Justice Kavanaugh being sworn in to succeed Anthony Kennedy as an Associate Justice on October 8, 2018
Justice Kavanaugh began his tenure as Supreme Court Justice on October 9, 2018, hearing arguments for Stokeling v. United States and United States v. Stitt. He authored his first opinion on January 8, 2019, in the case of Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., in which a unanimous Court reversed the appeals court opinion that had allowed a court to decide whether an issue in a contract between a dental equipment manufacturer and distributor should be decided by arbitration.
On February 27, Justice Kavanaugh once again joined Chief Justice Roberts and the court’s liberal justices in Garza v. Idaho, a Sixth Amendment case in which the court held that the Sixth Amendment’s presumption of prejudice of ineffective counsel applies to situations in which an attorney declines to file an appeal because an appeal waiver was signed as part of a plea agreement.
Conclusion:
Abraham Lincoln. The intensity of the illustrious president’s life, as well as the political and social accidents and the tragic accusations, many false ones that surrounded his life, have been evident in our history, and some are described by Emil Ludwig.
The full character and humorous sense of President Lincoln were the basis for his strong personality, acquired through the circumstances he lived. The citizen and political exemplarity that surrounds the life of the so-called Father of the Nation, he was slandered and accused for achieving his most fervent longing by abolishing the slavery of blacks in the United States.
Social justice issues can occur in relation to practically any aspect of society where inequality can arise as a result of unjust prejudices or policies. This judge has covered, from bench since 2003 when he was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit by President Bush, a wide viriarity of Social justice issues in his legal practice, first as an attorney and later as a judge Justice Honorable Brett Michael Kavanaugh.
We can be delineated into two categories, although they are often co-dependent: Inter-Social Treatment and Unequal Government Regulation.
Inter-Social Treatment involves treatment of a group(s) of other people based on personally-held biases and prejudices. These prejudices most often manifest in sociological categories such as:
Race
Gender
Age
Sexual Orientation
Religion
Nationality
Education
Mental or Physical Ability
Unequal Government Regulation involves laws and regulations that purposefully or otherwise create conditions that obstruct, limit, or deny a group(s) access to the same opportunities and resources, relative to the rest of society.
These laws can intentionally (explicitly) or unintentionally (implicitly) create the conditions for social injustice. Areas in which government policy often gives rise to social inequality and injustice include:
Voting Laws (i.e. redistricting and voter ID)
Policing Laws (i.e. traffic, search and seizure, and drug scheduling)
Environmental Laws (i.e. clean water and air, industrial waste disposal)
Health Care Laws (i.e. insurance mandates and coverage eligibility) (
Education Laws (i.e. public school segregation and integration)
Labor Laws (i.e. worker’s rights, occupational health and safety)
