Opinion pages in some of the nation's top publications reveal the deep divide around Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court

Brett Kavanaugh

The Senate is just hours away from holding a procedural vote that will determine how lawmakers will move forward with confirming Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court. If he’s confirmed, and once he’s sworn in, Kavanaugh begin a lifetime appointment on the bench.

But in the final hours, several editorial boards and columnists have sounded off — both for, and against, his nomination.

Recent polling indicates that voters generally hold an unfavorable view of Kavanaugh. According to analysis from CNN pollster Harry Enten, Kavanaugh is the least-liked Supreme Court nominee since 1987, when President Ronald Reagan nominated Judge Robert Bork.

Here’s what news organizations had to say about Kavanaugh:

The Wall Street Journal

In a column for The Wall Street Journal, Judge Brett Kavanaugh addressed his critics and admitted he grew „emotional“ during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week:

„I know that my tone was sharp, and I said a few things I should not have said. I hope everyone can understand that I was there as a son, husband and dad. I testified with five people foremost in my mind: my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters.

„Going forward, you can count on me to be the same kind of judge and person I have been for my entire 28-year legal career: hardworking, even-keeled, open-minded, independent and dedicated to the Constitution and the public good.“ 

Read the full column at The Wall Street Journal »

The New York Post

Gregg Nunziata, a former chief nominations counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee, undercut the claim that the FBI’s supplemental background check on Kavanaugh was not thorough, and threw cold water on the Democrats‘ calls for delaying the vote:

„Frustrated that the bureau hasn’t helped them bring down a nomination they otherwise oppose, Democrats have pivoted to attacking the FBI — specifically, claiming that the inquiry was curtailed to prejudice the outcome by limiting the pool of interviewees.

They’re wrong: The FBI followed procedure precisely.“

Read the full column at the New York Post »

Fox News

Hans A. von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative-leaning Heritage Foundation, argued it was „time to end this charade“ and urged the Senate to take a vote:

„Kavanaugh’s opponents are willing to say anything and use any tactics – no matter how unfair and cruel – to prevent his confirmation. And are doing this not because of anything disqualifying in his background or professional qualifications, but simply because of the way they believe he will rule in cases before the Supreme Court.

The worst part of all of this is that – in addition to the terrible ordeal and defamation that Kavanaugh and his family have been put through – good people who could serve our nation with great distinction as judges and other government officials will be deterred from public service.“

Read the full column at Fox News »

See the rest of the story at Business Insider
Source: Business insider

Kommentar verfassen