RSN Fundraising Banner
Hundreds of Law Professors Sign Letters Rejecting Kavanaugh Nomination
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=30101"><span class="small">Jon Swaine, Guardian UK</span></a>   
Thursday, 04 October 2018 08:25

Swaine writes: "Hundreds of US law professors are urging the Senate to reject Brett Kavanaugh's supreme court nomination because of his conduct at last week's hearing on sexual misconduct allegations."

Activists gather outside the U.S. Supreme Court to hold a vigil in opposition to US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanugh. (photo: Reuters)
Activists gather outside the U.S. Supreme Court to hold a vigil in opposition to US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanugh. (photo: Reuters)


Hundreds of Law Professors Sign Letters Rejecting Kavanaugh Nomination

By Jon Swaine, Guardian UK

04 October 18


Two letters, one from group of female legal academics, say Kavanaugh is ‘unable to adhere to judicial professionalism’

undreds of US law professors are urging the Senate to reject Brett Kavanaugh’s supreme court nomination because of his conduct at last week’s hearing on sexual misconduct allegations.

Signatures are being collected for two letters arguing that Kavanaugh disqualified himself with his angry and tearful remarks to the Senate judiciary committee. Kavanaugh claimed an allegation that he committed a sexual assault aged 17 was “a calculated and orchestrated political hit” by Democrats.

The professors say in their letters that Kavanaugh displayed contempt towards members of Congress and showed a political bias that could call into question his future rulings. They also say his temperament is unsuited to a lifetime position on the highest court.

Citing federal law and the American Bar Association’s code of judicial conduct, the academics note that Kavanaugh is obliged to promote “public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary” and will be required to step aside from a case if he is at risk of being perceived as unfair.

One of the letters, from a national group of female legal educators, accuses Kavanaugh of showing a disrespect for women, after he lashed out at Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota. Kavanaugh later apologised for asking Klobuchar about her drinking habits when she tried to ask about his own.

“Judge Kavanaugh’s lack of respect for our democratic institutions and women in positions of power in particular revealed that he does not have a judicial temperament and is unable to adhere to judicial professionalism,” says the letter.

The second letter says that while the questioning Kavanaugh faced was “of course painful”, he chose to be “intemperate, inflammatory and partial” rather than assist senators trying to assess the allegation against him.

That letter has been signed by hundreds of professors, including some from prestigious law schools such as Columbia, Harvard and Yale. The signatories say that despite having “differing views about the other qualifications of Judge Kavanaugh”, they are now agreed that he “did not display the impartiality and judicial temperament requisite to sit on the highest court of our land”.

Kavanaugh said in his remarks that Democrats were attacking him because of their anger about Donald Trump’s victory in the 2016 election or as “revenge on behalf of the Clintons”, all fuelled by “millions of dollars in money from outside leftwing opposition groups”.

During the 1990s, Kavanaugh aggressively pursued investigations into then president Bill Clinton while working for independent counsel Kenneth Starr.

The women’s letter says that as a result of his remarks, Kavanaugh could no longer realistically claim to be impartial when ruling on cases involving liberal groups.

“Judge Kavanaugh’s remarks suggest he would not give fair consideration to cases that he perceived to be brought by left-leaning organisations that he has already denigrated,” they write.

The deadline for signatures to the women’s letter was set for 8pm on Tuesday. A copy was obtained by the Guardian. Representatives of the group did not immediately respond to questions about how many professors had signed.

Professor Bernard Harcourt of Columbia law school, one of the organisers of the second letter, said it had attracted almost 400 signatures by late on Tuesday. The letter was scheduled to be delivered to the Senate at noon on Thursday.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+11 # ddd-rrr 2018-10-04 10:31
It was quite obvious in several respects in his recent testimony to the Senate
committee that Kavanaugh should never have occupied a seat on ANY court,
and especially that he should not occupy one on the highest court in the US.

He is clearly temperamentally unsuited for being an impartial and considerate
judge, in addition to his other evident failings which also disqualify him from
occupying such an important post as sitting on the Supreme Court of the US.

This should be obvious and evident to anyone capable of thinking about, and
of assessing, a candidate's appropriateness (or lack thereof) for a judgeship.

Brett Kavanaugh MUST NOT gain a life-time seat on our highest court!
 
 
+9 # wilhelmscream 2018-10-04 10:49
FBI RIGGED investigation under orders from “Trumphouse”!!
 
 
+9 # Skeeziks 2018-10-04 12:27
Trump. Kavanaugh. Graham. McConnell. Cruz. Pence.Limbaugh. FOX News.
They all sound the same when they speak "truths". Always lying. Always blaming someone else for their wrongs.

If the Senate goes all in for Kavanaugh, that will be proof positive that we are in deep waters that will flow even more dangerously looking to wipe out our great U.S.A. ideals and future hopes. VOTE!!! VOTE!!! VOTE!!! And get as many people as you can to get out and vote for Democrats. Then we'll start on the Democrats to lead us to where we know we want to be. And it's not the place where the now, in power Republicans, are leading us.

They're not in complete power right now but with episodes like the Kavanaugh push, that will be a great foothold for tyranny, the likes of which others in the past have lived.

If the Democrats don't show signs of leading us to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then they'll find themselves outside, looking in.

Most of us know we are not perfect but the Republican Party believes they are perfect.
 
 
+1 # librarian1984 2018-10-05 07:18
I've heard there are more than 1700 signatories now.
 
 
+1 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-10-05 07:28
I agree with the law professors that Kavanaugh's performance at the senate hearing made him unfit to be a supreme court judge, or any judge. I don't believe that the sexual assault charges brought against him are true. But his reaction to these charges, whether true or false, showed someone who does not know how to handle a very difficult case. This article does not quote the comment from one of the letters about the necessity for a judge to have a commitment to truth seeking, no matter what is at stake. He did not show that in the senate hearing.