Open Letter to the United States Senate from Law Professors Around the Country

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: gortex

as the trainwreck of " opposition " to justice kavanaugh has mutated to " he is not fit / lacks demeanour " to serve

commenters SHOULD know who ginsberg is - hell they should know the other 7 SCOTUS justices too

but it takes` a special kind of wingnut mental gymnastics to " conclude " that kavanaugh is unfit , yet ginsberg is fit to serve

Ginsberg was an open activist at the time of her appointment. It was her successful pursuit of justice for gender equality that won her the nomination. What is Kavanaugh's sctivist platform? Roe V Wade?... because Sen Collins is confident he won't touch Roe V Wade.

So, what is Kavanaugh's cause that puts in the same category as Justice Ginsberg?

In other words ginsburg is allowed to be partisan because you like her positions.

Kavanaugh is not allowed to be because you dont like his.

The hypocrisy is astounding!

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Why is political activism something that uniquely qualifies you to be a SCOTUS justice?

Generally speaking, political activism these days particularly is as partisan as it gets.

a reply to: ketsuko

If you can't be bothered to know who the other SCOTUS justices are and their own judicial temperment, then why are making opinions about whether or not Kavanaugh has the appropriate temper?

I haven't made any opinions other than after watching his testimony I agree with the open letter by his peers.
Must I know the temperaments of all Republican politicians to express an opinion of the President ?

a reply to: ketsuko

Why is political activism something that uniquely qualifies you to be a SCOTUS justice?

I never said it was. But no one can deny that it was Ruth Bader Ginsberg's successful activism that propelled her to the top of her field and earned her the nomination. And, I think there were only 4 votes against her. She won her SCOTUS position by a landslide.

originally posted by: FyreByrd
Think what you will about - assault allegations, perjury allegations and other questionable behavior both public and private.

This is an open letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee from 500+ Law Professors representing 90 different Law Schools.

Judicial temperament is one of the most important qualities of a judge.

As the Congressional Research Service explains, to be a judge requires that an individual have “a personality that is evenhanded, unbiased, impartial, courteous yet firm, and dedicated to a process, not a result.”

[1] The concern for judicial temperament dates back to our founding; in Federalist Paper 78, entitled “Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” Alexander Hamilton expressed the need for “the integrity and moderation of the judiciary.”

We are law professors who teach, research, and write about the judicial institutions of this country. Many of us appear in state and federal court, and our work means that we will continue to do so, including before the United States Supreme Court.

We regret that we feel compelled to write to you to provide our views that at the Senate hearings on Thursday, September 27, 2018, the Honorable Brett Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land.

The question at issue was of course painful for anyone. But Judge Kavanaugh exhibited a lack of commitment to judicious inquiry. Instead of being open to the necessary search for accuracy, Judge Kavanaugh was repeatedly aggressive with questioners.


Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh located the hearing as a partisan question, referring to it as “a calculated and orchestrated political hit,” rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory, and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to questioners.

www.scribd.com...

In short, this man (and I use the term broadly), is unfit to serve in any capacity as a Judge.

Would you want him 'judging' your son, your daughter?

in case you missed it .... it is worth the listen, It speaks directly to this subject

a reply to: Grambler

In other words ginsburg is allowed to be partisan because you like her positions.

Can you show me an example of Ginsberg being partisan? Is the Constitution partisan? Were the "Never Trumpers" partisan?

Being a Social Justice Warrior, like Ruth Ginsberg, doesn't equal partisanship. Maybe you didn't know that one of the cases that propelled Ginsberg to the top of her field was when she represented a man whose wife died in childbirth, couldn't work while raising his newborn son, and was denied Social Security death benfits based on his gender. She successfully argued his case before the US Supreme Court. Was that a partisan case, in you opinion?

And, by the way, Roe V Wade was pushed through and passed into law by Republicans and by a Republican majority SCOTUS.

a reply to: ketsuko

At this point, it's evident what you've been told is what you think.
You've learned that lesson well and let others do the opinion making for you.

I see you added an insult , well done.

Apparently the liberal professors think when the media is calling you a serial rapist you should just sit there and smile ?

*slow claps*

Apparently, that's what they think....

a reply to: Gazrok

That's what I take away from it, as well.