Basically Kavanaugh did what everyone said he would and he overturned US v Nixon even though he lied about it during his confirmation even though before he argued repeatedly it was a bad decision. So either he lied or he miraculously changed his beliefs for the duration of the Senate hearing.
https://www.peoplefor.org/press-releases/fact-check-kavanaug...
Someone's going to come along and tell me that the vitriol is necessary and good because the Supreme Court is so clearly and unequivocally evil, but that's just the point. Even the threads on the Israel-Hamas war have had better-quality discussions with more nuance than the hot takes and hatred that have been plaguing HN the last few weeks on these threads.
We can do better. I've seen it.
That’s the sad part? We have different perceptions reality.
It does not mean that Congress can't have political qualifications for justices, and in fact George Washington had a failed nomination because his nominee was politically unpopular.
> So I think the first thing that makes a good judge is independence, not being swayed by political or public pressure. That takes some backbone. That takes some judicial fortitude.
> The great moments in American judicial history, the judges had backbone and independence. You think about Youngstown Steel. You think about, for example, Brown v. Board of Education, where the Court came together and knew they were going to face political pressure and still enforced the promise of the Constitution.
> You think about United States v. Nixon, which I have identified as one of the greatest moments in American judicial history, where Chief Justice Burger, who had been appointed by President Nixon, brought the Court together in a unanimous decision to order President Nixon, in response to a criminal trial subpoena, to disclose information. Those great moments of independence and unanimity are important.
[0] https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-115shrg32765/pdf/CH...
[0] https://transcripts.cnn.com/show/cnr/date/2018-09-05/segment...
[1] https://scholarship.law.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3383...
Impeachment is a difficult process. Given that Trump survived (twice), I'm not sure this would work:
https://www.axios.com/2024/06/14/scotus-supreme-court-claren...
> [Kavanaugh] lied about it during his confirmation
Kavanaugh said Roe was "entitled the respect under principles of stare decisis" and similar remarks. But that still leaves it in a category that can and has been overturned by past courts. Here are a few such examples where they overturned settled precedents entitled to deference under the principles of stare decisis: https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/a-short-list-of-overturn...
Once you know that such rulings can and have been overturned before, you can see that he never once said anything at all like "I won't (or can't) overturn Roe" in his comments. You can find his comments in full here:
https://www.factcheck.org/2022/05/what-gorsuch-kavanaugh-and...
You can say that this makes his comments misleading to people who don't realize that stare decisis doesn't mean that SCOTUS can't or won't overturn a past ruling, but the fact that "everyone said he would" overturn Roe really cuts against that his statements actually mislead anyone.
