Posts

One Question: Why Kavanaugh?

[NB: As always, check the byline.]

I don’t have anything new to add to the work Marcy has done so far in her analysis of SCOTUS nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony and statements and those of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford. Nor can I add to bmaz’ criticism of the subsequent investigation.

Voluminous amounts of material have been generated by this confirmation process, including a redacted transcript of a Senate Judiciary Committee phone interview with Kavanaugh released last evening. Myriad questions have been asked about Kavanaugh’s past and his false statements. Given the confirmation process is a job interview, after all we’ve seen and heard publicly, it must be asked: Why Kavanaugh?

Why is the White House and the GOP portion of the Senate Judiciary Committee so deeply invested in Kavanaugh’s confirmation?

Why do they remain staunchly behind him when they’ve long had a list of other identified SCOTUS justice candidates?

Why were those candidates, the first 11 identified in May 2016 during the Trump campaign, inadequate such that Kavanaugh was added later in November 2017 to the candidate list?

Is the man we’ve seen and read so much about really the very best candidate this White House could produce for this lifetime appointment?

Why is a man whose behavior was so disrespectful of the Senate, of the Constitution, of the need for neutral nonpartisan mindset so important that the White House and GOP SJC are willing to burn down what little goodwill remains with centrists and with women and minorities?

Why the sustained commitment to a nominee who so easily lies under oath, in full view of the public?

Why stand so pat behind a nominee whose license to practice law could yet be suspended or worse because he has lied repeatedly under oath?

Do the White House and GOP SJC believe the average American would hire somebody who is supposed to be a careful arbiter of the law but who yells at and lies to his employers’ representatives during an interview?

Why are the White House and GOP SJC willing to risk exposing yet more unpleasantness about Kavanaugh given how much has already surfaced about his iffy finances and his lying about his behavior in high school and college?

Why are White House and GOP SJC willing to risk negatively affecting the mid-term elections with their commitment to Kavanaugh?

Why the investment in social media to prop up support behind Kavanaugh — both in the form of “revisions” to Wikipedia entries related to terms questioned during last Thursday’s hearing, and tweets from the SJC’s account?

Why was a Fox cable network interview necessary for the nominee of a nonpartisan job?

Media is marketing — why does this nominee need to be promoted with the public?

Why haven’t they teased an alternative nominee to test the public’s willingness to support them in lieu of Kavanaugh?

Given an alternative candidate of comparable educational and work history, would the average American as an employer offering a lifetime appointment really pick Kavanaugh over anyone else?

Why are the White House and the GOP SJC insisting Kavanaugh’s confirmation be rushed for what appear to the public to be wholly arbitrary reasons?

Everything about this confirmation process makes no sense; it undermines faith in the Senate Judiciary Committee and may taint the Supreme Court. We must know: Why Kavanaugh?

__________

This is an open thread.

Kavanaugh Hearing: The Aftermath

[NB: CHECK THE BYLINE.]

It was a disaster, no matter how Republicans spin it. As after a disaster, damage continues.

Brett Kavanaugh was an aggressive and belligerent drunk according to a former Yale roommate. His incredibly rude behavior before the Senate yesterday proved his belligerence didn’t require alcohol. Yelling at seated senators, talking over the women who asked him questions — he did not demonstrate either respect for their office as the representatives of the people, nor did he display appropriate judicial temperament.

He also lied several times. Call it prevarication, untruthiness, fib, whatever label makes you feel more comfortable but what came out of his mouth did not match facts.

The SJC’s GOP faction knew he was at extreme risk, particularly so when their hired girl reverted to a prosecutor’s role and asked Kavanaugh about his calendar. It was at this point that Mitchell was ‘disappeared’ and Lindsey Graham flipped his wig, stepping up to put on an act worthy of an Academy Award for a supporting actor. So very Shakespearean in his castigation; woe, woe betide those who dared to ignore the wholly arbitrary deadline the GOP forced on this train wreck confirmation.

Poppycock and nonsense. We haven’t forgotten Merrick Garland and the unacceptable theft of his place on the Supreme Court.

Lest anyone claim Graham wasn’t acting: he was seen laughing in the hallway after the hearing, yucking it up with a couple other GOP senators. His cadre welcomed him later with applause as he entered a closed door meeting.

EDIT — I’d thought of this Carl Sandburg quote yesterday during Graham’s ‘performance’, meant to include it here:

“If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.”

Nice drama, babe. You’ve got a second career waiting for you after you leave office — hopefully sooner than later.

The Jesuit magazine which had endorsed Kavanaugh saw through the acts; they revoked their endorsement last night, saying they “recognize that this nomination is no longer in the best interests of the country.”

The American Bar Association expressed its concerns about Kavanaugh’s confirmation and asked the confirmation to be delayed until after a more thorough investigation.

Somebody else is worried about the confirmation, enough that they dispatched George W. Bush to lean on fencesittng GOP holdouts.

Imagine how bad it is that Bush must get engaged in this mess to cover for Trump’s inadequacies as a negotiator, though we shouldn’t overlook the possibility Bush has skin in the game if any cases come before the Supreme Court in which he is a defendant.

And Alan Dershowitz called for a delay to allow for an FBI investigation. Yeah, it was that bad.

In minutes the Senate Judiciary Committee will meet and then we’ll know whether this farcical nomination will continue on to the full Senate.

EDIT — 10:19 AM — AP News reports Senate Judiciary Committee will vote at 1:30 pm today on forwarding Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full senate.

Be sure to check out Marcy’s more detailed analysis of yesterday’s hearing. This is an open thread.

If you haven’t called your senators, do so. Congressional switchboard: (202) 224-3121.

Contra Kavanaugh, Redux

[NB: CHECK THE BYLINE.]

I wanted to put this post up earlier for the purposes of an open thread to accompany today’s political theater — I mean, the next Kavanaugh hearing.

Unfortunately I have been too upset to touch my keyboard. It was Rachel Mitchell’s grilling of witness Dr. Ford, treating her like a criminal instead of a victim, which flipped my switch.

Oh I am wholly enraged now. Do NOT fuck with me today.

I can see all the women in my multiple social media timelines equally upset and angry, swaying back and forth between crying and raging at the Republican assholes seated as Senate Judiciary Committee members.

Even now Grassley is interrupting the hearing’s flow to insert his own testimony of the timeline to questioning Dr. Ford, thereby reducing the amount of time the Democratic members have to question Dr. Ford. It’s a filibuster and he can’t yet explain why he didn’t ask for an FBI investigation.

Absolutely enraging.

The nomination of Brett Kavanaugh and the subsequent abuse of Dr. Ford has been a gross unforced error on the part of the Republican Party and the Trump administration. The questionable election of admitted sexual abuser Trump encouraged the largest number of women ever to run for public office. The 116th Congress will be very different because of this ongoing pink wave, first seen in the streets the day of the 2017 Women’s March.

This hearing and everything that led up to it will trigger an avalanche, a tsunami.

Get your rage on, let it out here. Burn it down and salt the earth, pave the way for that massive wave to come.

“In exchange for fire we women
Were made, another fire, greater
Much harder to fight.”

“We are women: in some things, we hesitate.
But in others, no one can surpass our courage.”
— Euripides

Gods help Kavanaugh when he appears later today. Gaia may slip her axis if he and the GOP senators fuck up any more badly than they have with women.

UPDATE: Kavanaugh’s performance today proved he does not have the appropriate judicial temperament appropriate to his current job let alone the Supreme Court.

CALL YOUR SENATORS NOW and tell them to vote NO on Kavanaugh.

Congressional switchboard: (202) 224-3121

If their D.C. line is busy or their mailbox is full, try contacting your senators’ local office numbers. Time is of the essence given the Republicans are meeting this evening to tally votes.

Graphic: Quino Al via Unsplash (mod by Rayne)

Whip It, Whip It Good: Krunchtime on Kavanaugh

[NB: AS ALWAYS, check the byline. This post is by moi, Rayne.]

On this last day of Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings, witnesses spoke regarding Brett Kavanaugh’s fitness (or lack thereof) to serve a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.

The last three days have been both grueling and enlightening. It looks more than ever like a concerted effort between interested parties selected and nominated Kavanaugh — not in a manner typically of previous nominees, but in the interest of those whose personal fortunes and legal status hinge directly on the existence of a conservative on the court who will decide in their favor.

Parties like Trump’s administration, his campaign donors, his personal business circle; parties like war criminals who served in previous administrations; and parties like Trump supporters, who expect their quid pro quo delivered in the form of religious freedom to deny others’ civil rights.

One could argue this is business as usual but it’s not, when the president himself is already implicated as an unindicted co-conspirator who may directly benefit from a swing justice who believes in unrestrained executive power.

How could a reasonable person not come to the conclusion that the collaborative, collective, concerted effort behind Kavanaugh is a conspiracy to obstruct justice?

Let’s fight fire with fire, get in ‘good trouble‘ as Rep. John Lewis calls it; let’s collaborate and collectively lay out before the public who is willing to support this obstruction and who is not before Kavanaugh’s nomination goes to the entire Senate for a vote. Are you ready to whip the people’s Senate? Are you willing to make phone calls and ask your senators where they stand on Kavanaugh?

I’ll go first; I’ll fill in your responses from your senators in the table below as you collect them and share them in comments below.

Congressional switchboard number: (202) 224-3121

Whip List

State

Party

Name

Seat up

Vote Y/N

Alabama

R

Richard Shelby

2022

Yes [1]
Alabama

D

Doug Jones

2020

WAFFLING
Alaska

R

Lisa Murkowski

2022

WAFFLING
Alaska

R

Dan Sullivan

2020

Yes [1]
Arizona

R

Jeff Flake

2018

LEAN YES [1]

Arizona

R

Jon Kyl

2020

Yes [1]
Arkansas

R

John Boozman

2022

Yes [1]
Arkansas

R

Tom Cotton

2020

Yes [1]
California

D

Dianne Feinstein

2018

No*
California

D

Kamala Harris

2022

No
Colorado

D

Michael Bennet

2022

No [1]
Colorado

R

Cory Gardner

2020

LEAN YES [1]
Connecticut

D

Richard Blumenthal

2022

No [1]
Connecticut

D

Chris Murphy

2018

No [1]
Delaware

D

Tom Carper

2018

No [1]
Delaware

D

Chris Coons

2020

LEAN NO [1]
Florida

D

Bill Nelson

2018

LEAN NO [1]
Florida

R

Marco Rubio

2022

Yes [1]
Georgia

R

Johnny Isakson

2022

Yes [1]
Georgia

R

David Perdue

2020

Yes [1]
Hawaii

D

Brian Schatz

2022

No [1]
Hawaii

D

Mazie Hirono

2018

No
Idaho

R

Mike Crapo

2022

Yes [1]
Idaho

R

Jim Risch

2020

Yes [1]
Illinois

D

Dick Durbin

2020

LEAN NO [1]
Illinois

D

Tammy Duckworth

2022

No
Indiana

D

Joe Donnelly

2018

WAFFLING
Indiana

R

Todd Young

2022

Yes [1]
Iowa

R

Chuck Grassley

2022

LEAN YES [1]
Iowa

R

Joni Ernst

2020

Yes [1]
Kansas

R

Pat Roberts

2020

Yes [1]
Kansas

R

Jerry Moran

2022

Yes [1]
Kentucky

R

Mitch McConnell

2020

Yes [1]
Kentucky

R

Rand Paul

2022

Yes [1]
Louisiana

R

Bill Cassidy

2020

Yes [1]
Louisiana

R

John Kennedy

2022

Yes [1]
Maine

R

Susan Collins

2020

WAFFLING
Maine

I

Angus King

2018

No
Maryland

D

Ben Cardin

2018

No
Maryland

D

Chris Van Hollen

2022

No
Massachusetts

D

Elizabeth Warren

2018

No
Massachusetts

D

Ed Markey

2020

No
Michigan

D

Debbie Stabenow

2018

No
Michigan

D

Gary Peters

2020

No
Minnesota

D

Amy Klobuchar

2018

No [1]
Minnesota

D

Tina Smith

2018

No [1]
Mississippi

R

Roger Wicker

2018

Yes
Mississippi

R

Cindy Hyde-Smith

2018

Yes
Missouri

D

Claire McCaskill

2018

WAFFLING
Missouri

R

Roy Blunt

2022

Yes
Montana

D

Jon Tester

2018

LEAN NO [1]
Montana

R

Steve Daines

2020

Yes [1]
Nebraska

R

Deb Fischer

2018

LEAN YES [1]
Nebraska

R

Ben Sasse

2020

LEAN YES [1]
Nevada

R

Dean Heller

2018

Yes [1]
Nevada

D

Catherine Cortez Masto

2022

LEAN NO [1]
New Hampshire

D

Jeanne Shaheen

2020

No
New Hampshire

D

Maggie Hassan

2022

No
New Jersey

D

Bob Menendez

2018

No [1]
New Jersey

D

Cory Booker

2020

No
New Mexico

D

Tom Udall

2020

No [1]
New Mexico

D

Martin Heinrich

2018

No
New York

D

Chuck Schumer

2022

No
New York

D

Kirsten Gillibrand

2018

No
North Carolina

R

Richard Burr

2022

Yes [1]
North Carolina

R

Thom Tillis

2020

Yes
North Dakota

R

John Hoeven

2022

Yes
North Dakota

D

Heidi Heitkamp

2018

WAFFLING
Ohio

D

Sherrod Brown

2018

No [1]
Ohio

R

Rob Portman

2022

Yes [1]
Oklahoma

R

Jim Inhofe

2020

Yes [1]
Oklahoma

R

James Lankford

2022

LEAN YES [1]
Oregon

D

Ron Wyden

2022

No
Oregon

D

Jeff Merkley

2020

No
Pennsylvania

D

Bob Casey Jr.

2018

No [1]
Pennsylvania

R

Pat Toomey

2022

Yes [1]
Rhode Island

D

Jack Reed

2020

No [1]
Rhode Island

D

Sheldon Whitehouse

2018

No [1]
South Carolina

R

Lindsey Graham

2020

Yes [1]
South Carolina

R

Tim Scott

2022

Yes [1]
South Dakota

R

John Thune

2022

Yes [1]
South Dakota

R

Mike Rounds

2020

Yes [1]
Tennessee

R

Lamar Alexander

2020

Yes [1]
Tennessee

R

Bob Corker

2018

Yes*
Texas

R

John Cornyn

2020

Yes [1]
Texas

R

Ted Cruz

2018

Yes [1]
Utah

R

Orrin Hatch

2018

Yes [1]
Utah

R

Mike Lee

2022

Yes [1]
Vermont

D

Patrick Leahy

2022

LEAN NO [1]
Vermont

I

Bernie Sanders

2018

No
Virginia

D

Mark Warner

2020

No [1]
Virginia

D

Tim Kaine

2018

No
Washington

D

Patty Murray

2022

No
Washington

D

Maria Cantwell

2018

No
West Virginia

D

Joe Manchin

2018

WAFFLING
West Virginia

R

Shelley Moore Capito

2020

Yes [1]
Wisconsin

R

Ron Johnson

2022

Yes [1]
Wisconsin

D

Tammy Baldwin

2018

No [1]
Wyoming

R

Mike Enzi

2020

LEAN YES [1]
Wyoming

R

John Barrasso

2018

Yes [1]

*  Qualified response, subject to final confirmation.

[1]  Firm Yes votes based on WhipTheVote.org‘s tally.

Latest  update: 12 September 2018 7:30 pm EDT

This is NOT an open thread. Please stay on on topic — the Kavanaugh confirmation — to make tracking votes easier. Thanks!

Contra Kavanaugh

[As always, check the byline — this is by me, Rayne, and I am not the lawyer on this crew.]

Call your senators RIGHT NOW and insist they do whatever they can to halt Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. He should not be confirmed.

Congressional switchboard number: (202) 224-3121

Leave a voicemail, don’t put it off; there’s less than 24 hours before the hearing begins. Do you need a script to help make your call? Check with @Celeste_pewter at this link; she has you covered. Send a fax if you’d rather. Look up your senators’ contact details at GovTrack.us. But do it, RIGHT NOW. Come back to this when you’re done.

~ | ~ |~

Now that’s the important part of this post, the must-do call to action right up front. Drop everything and make the call before proceeding. Persuade friends and family to do the same right now.

The rest of this post is a formality over which I have fretted for more than a week. There are myriad articles out there, new ones published every day, explaining Kavanaugh’s judicial history and why he is unacceptable as a justice with a life-time appointment.

The most important reason, though, is evident in the actions of the White House and the GOP combined.

Bad, Bad Faith

They have acted and continue to act in bad faith about everything while in office. Kavanaugn’s nomination and their handling of the vetting process is but one more cluster of bad faith acts.

If this administration had nominated Kavanaugh in good faith, his works would have been openly available to the Senate Judiciary Democrats with few exceptions — but this is not the case.

If Kavanaugh himself was a good faith nominee, he would be pushing for his work to be open for evaluation — but he is silent.

If the GOP Congress was acting in good faith, they, too, would demand all Kavanaugh’s documents — but they aren’t. Senator Susan Collins in particular deserves a drubbing here, having signaled an intent to approve Kavanaugh based on the documents she’s seen so far and they are a piddling amount of the documents Kavanaugh created or was involved with during his career. She is willfully buying a pig in a poke in spite of her position on women’s reproductive health.

The hurry to seat Kavanaugh is also unnecessary; Mitch McConnell wants him to begin on October 1 with the SCOTUS’ next session. To meet this wholly arbitrary deadline McConnell has broken with past practice — and shorted the production of documents related to Kavanaugh’s work history.

It’s not just the Trump administration, either, since many of the withheld documents were generated during the Bush administration. An unprecedented and partisan review process by George W. Bush administration lawyers is running in tandem with the National Archives and Records Administration’s document production, which the NARA calls “something that has never happened before.” NARA can’t produce the Kavanaugh documents before the end of October; the Bush lawyers are cherry-picking their selection to meet the 9:30 a.m. Tuesday hearing.

Given what we know of the Bush administration’s efforts on torture and surveillance alone, Senate Democrats are right to be worried about the insufficiency of documents. Pat Leahy indicated what few documents they’ve received include many duplicates, further frustrating analysis.

Why are the administration and the GOP trying so hard to prevent access to documentation of Kavanaugh’s work history? Why the sudden reversal on transparency after a Republicans-only meeting on July 24th? What of the concerns Leahy expressed in an August 17th letter to White House Counsel Don McGahn?

…do you have reason to believe any of the records relate to:
1. The legal justifications or policies relating to the treatment of detainees?
2. The rules governing the detention of combatants?
3. The warrantless wiretapping of Americans?
4. A proposed constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between one man and one woman?

These topics are far too weighty to be given deliberate short shrift — the specificity of exclusion is troubling, especially when combined with questions about Kavanaugh’s questionable finances and the likelihood Kavanaugh lied under oath before the Senate in 2006. It gives the appearance of a cover-up, which is more than bad faith; it’s malignancy.

Before Justice Kennedy retired we had already quite enough of GOP bad faith. Obama’s SCOTUS nominee Merrick Garland should have had a hearing; his work product had not been suppressed. Obama’s previous nominees had likewise been fully vetted, their documents made available. But Mitch McConnell suppressed Obama’s last appointment in bad faith; there is nothing at all in the Constitution to support the Senate’s denial of Obama’s appointment by refusing to evaluate his nominee.

Article 2, Section 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

(emphasis mine)

Refusing to hold a hearing meant a rejection of the Senate’s role to advise and consent. By the simplest interpretation of the Constitution, McConnell violated his oath of office by failing to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and to well and faithfully discharge the duties of his office.

Unfortunately there is no remedy save for impeachment of McConnell or removal by voters and neither will happen before Tuesday.

Unindicted Co-Conspirator-in-Chief

The next critical reason why Kavanaugh should neither receive a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing nor be confirmed is Trump’s current status as an unindicted co-conspirator.  Although the current conspiracy for which Trump has not yet been indicted is not now in Special Counsel’s folio, we cannot know until after Special Counsel’s Office has completed their work whether Kavanaugh’s appointment was part of a larger conspiracy to defraud the U.S. The Senate should exercise its role to advise and consent by refraining from evaluation of Kavanaugh until Trump’s status is resolved — and the Senate Judiciary Dems should uniformly reject a hearing and confirmation.

What is already known about Kavanaugh suggests he will not act neutrally should the prosecution of any case involving Trump as a co-conspirator come before the SCOTUS. In 2009 Kavanaugh wrote for the Minnesota Law Review on deferrals of civil suits, criminal investigations and prosecutions of the president,

… The indictment and trial of a sitting President, moreover, would cripple the federal government, rendering it unable to function with credibility in either the international or domestic arenas. Such an outcome would ill serve the public interest, especially in times of financial or national security crisis.

Even the lesser burdens of a criminal investigation—including preparing for questioning by criminal investigators—are time-consuming and distracting. Like civil suits, criminal investigations take the President’s focus away from his or her responsibilities to the people. And a President who is concerned about an ongoing criminal investigation is almost inevitably going to do a worse job as President.

In the same article, Kavanaugh encouraged Congress to write legislation “exempting a President—while in office—from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel.”

This opinion is flawed and based on what he saw of Clinton, Bush, and Obama presidencies. We no longer have a president who is absorbed by the duties of the office, taking roughly 25% of his time in office to commit violations of the Emoluments Clause by playing golf at his own resorts. The Special Counsel’s Office investigation hasn’t disrupted his golf game; it hasn’t disrupted the remaining 75% of his time in office save for Trump’s entirely elective and unnecessary kvetching via Twitter about a witch hunt.

No feedback from senators so far indicates Kavanaugh would recuse himself on cases coming before SCOTUS related to civil suits or criminal charges against Trump.

Health Care, Women’s Reproductive Rights, Settled Law Unsettled

These issues are all of a piece since they are interrelated by a narrow number of cases and will likely come down to swing senators who claim to care most about these issues — senators Collins and Lisa Murkowski. Kavanaugh has been interviewed by Collins who says she believes he is in agreement with her that Roe v. Wade is settled law and not likely to change. Collins, however, has been screwed over repeatedly by her party in no small part because she trusts uterus-deficient counterparts to see women’s reproductive rights as she does (this is an awful wordy way to say she’s easily played).

Lindsey Graham, however, left off sucking up to Trump to suggest Roe could be overturned by Kavanaugh because “a precedent is important but it’s not inviolate.” Having said this on at least two different Sunday talk shows one might wonder if he is leading Kavanaugh or Collins and Murkowski.

No Senate Democrat should give Graham or Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt, though. His dissent in Garza v. Hargan, the D.C. Circuit case in which a 17-year-old asylum seeker sought an abortion while in U.S. custody, is disturbing. He wrote,

The Government has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating abortion. …

No. The government has no interests in favoring fetal life as if fetuses had rights co-equal to the mother, teen or adult, whether free or in detention. Forcing a minor to carry another child to term is not in the government’s interests; it’s child abuse.

Kavanaugh’s opinion in Priests for Life v. HHS, wrestling with the issue of religious freedom versus access to contraception, is also disturbing. He concluded,

First, under Hobby Lobby, the regulations substantially burden the religious organizations’ exercise of religion because the regulations require the organizations to take an action contrary to their sincere religious beliefs (submitting the form) or else pay significant monetary penalties.

Second, that said, Hobby Lobby strongly suggests that the Government has a compelling interest in facilitating access to contraception for the employees of these religious organizations.

Third, this case therefore comes down to the least restrictive means question.

Nowhere in this conclusion does it ever occur to Kavanaugh there are other reasons women are prescribed birth control besides contraception which have nothing to do with employers’ religious beliefs. To be fair, most men are clueless about the benefits of birth control for minimizing cramps and managing other debilitating menstrual problems. But this conclusion combined with the dissent in Garza do not assure that Kavanaugh will see Roe as settled.

Semi-Automatic Weapons Wankery

Not good. Kavanaugh dissented in Heller v. District of Columbia, a case which upheld Washington D.C.’s ban on semi-automatic weapons, writing that the Supreme Court

“held that handguns — the vast majority of which today are semiautomatic — are constitutionally protected because they have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens.”

This blows off the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban which expired in 2004 and should have been renewed since civilian deaths by assault weapons escalated after 2004.

Kavanaugh couldn’t be trusted to support a ban on assault weapons which are semi-automatic.

Net Neutrality No-Go

This issue infuriates me as much as Kavanaugh’s dissent on Garza. Last year in U.S. Telecom Association v. FCC he wrote,

… While the net neutrality rule applies to those ISPs that hold themselves out as neutral, indiscriminate conduits to internet content, the converse is also true: the rule does not apply to an ISP holding itself out as providing something other than a neutral, indiscriminate pathway—i.e., an ISP making sufficiently clear to potential customers that it provides a filtered service involving the ISP’s exercise of “editorial intervention.” …

Except ISPs are nearly inseparable from telecom — which we would not allow any editorial rights over content — and ISPs are too thin in some markets, forcing customers to accept what might be the only ISP in their area along with that ISP’s “editorial intervention.”

I’m also disturbed by the examples he used of throttled content like Netflix and Ticketmaster while ignoring the possibility an ISP could exercise “editorial intervention” over essential services like email and VoIP.

Nothing like having Verizon sitting on the Supreme Court.

Surveillance State

Good Lord, his understanding of metadata…Kavanaugh wrote in his opinion for Larry E. Klayman v. Barack Obama, et al. (2015) denying an emergency petition,

… In my view, that critical national security need outweighs the impact on privacy occasioned by this program. The Government’s program does not capture the content of communications, but rather the time and duration of calls, and the numbers called. In short, the Government’s program fits comfortably within the Supreme Court precedents applying the special needs doctrine. … In sum, the Fourth Amendment does not bar the Government’s bulk collection of telephony metadata under this program. …

There’s no chance at all to his thinking that metadata itself could be the message.

~ | ~ |~

That’s more than enough without having to really dig, and I haven’t even touched on Kavanaugh with regard to LGBT equality. White House and GOP bad faith is enough reason to insist Kavanaugh not be confirmed.

If you made it this far without having called your senators, do it RIGHT NOW and insist they do whatever they can to halt Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court. He should not serve a lifetime as a justice given what we already know.

Congressional switchboard number: (202) 224-3121

Graphic: Quino Al via Unsplash (mod by Rayne)

Three Things: Call, Call, Call!

[As always, note the byline — this isn’t Marcy’s post. / ~Rayne]

Dial (202) 224-3121.

If you don’t already have this number memorized or logged as a contact, have it tattooed on your body where you can see it. Afraid of needles? Use henna for a temporary tattoo. You’re going to need this number until Congress breaks before the mid-term elections.

~ 3 ~

The White House’s occupant was supposed to announce today the nominee to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy. Call your senators and tell them to refuse to hold hearings on this nomination.

If they are GOP, tell them it’s too close to the mid-term elections and the people deserve to have a say — in short, use the same argument Mitch “Turtlehead” McConnell used when he refused to hold a Judiciary Committee hearing to approve President Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland.

If your senator(s) are Democrats or Independents, tell them they must deny a president who is under investigation any nominee to a lifetime seat as long as there is a cloud over the presidency. If they cannot fend off a Judiciary Committee hearing, insist they do not vote for any nominee who seeks to overturn Roe v. Wade. Nor should they confirm a justice who will not recuse themselves from any case against Trump or his campaign arising from Department of Justice investigations, nor should they approve a justice who believes the president is in any way above the law, immune in ways the public is not.

I’ve come to resist The Hill as it has become ridiculously biased, but this op-ed is worth a read: The ‘McConnell Rule’ is law, and Senate Democrats should sue to enforce it.

Live by Turtlehead’s rule, die by it.

Need a script for your calls? See Celeste Pewter at this link.

~ 2 ~

Your next call is again to your senators, this time on the nomination of Brian Benczkowski to the Department of Justice as Assistant Attorney General.

Senator Dick Durbin has already been working on this:

Read the letter’s text and the rest of his comments on Twitter at this link. Benczkowski’s nomination should be withdrawn; it is little more than another form of obstruction of justice.

This is another poisonous nomination; just as a president under investigation shouldn’t be permitted to appoint justices, neither should he be able to appoint nominees to the Justice Department with such serious conflicts related to the same investigation. Benckowski’s nomination is simply corrupt.

~ 1 ~

WHERE ARE THE CHILDREN?

Not the Thai students who’ve been trapped in cave but the thousands of children from infants to teens who have been separated from their asylum-seeking parents for no legal reason apart from institutionalized terror in the form of human trafficking.

The lack of a means to trace children as they were placed in camps, foster homes, gods know where else is a clear indication of intention: this administration meant for these children to be lost to their parents. This administration did not want to be held accountable by any tracking.

As I’ve said before, it’s criminal. Media shouldn’t expend one lick more time on scum like Alan Dershowitz (like The New York Times’ allocation of six journalists to his obstructionist ass) and instead should be hounding the government to find and unite these children with their parents, documenting application of immigration and asylum laws, and reporting on the creation of concentration camps (that’s exactly what they are).

Call your representatives in both houses of Congress and demand a legislative fix — Rep. Nadler’s Keep Families Together Act (HR 6135) and Sen. Schumer’s call for a Reunification Czar — to bar the executive branch from separating families. I also want to bar the use of military resources for this purpose.

See Celeste Pewter at this link if you need more overview and a script for calling.

Some of the children are being reunited under court order — like this one-year-old who appeared before a judge, alone — but if the government never had a plan in place to track children separated from families, how do we know all the children will be reunited?

~ 0 ~

Every Monday seems considerably worse, but I’m not going to face them on my knees. Instead I will be contacting Congress. What about you?

Friday Morning [?!]: Chamber of Delights

It’s Friday. FINALLY. And it’s jazz exploration day, too. Today we sample some chamber jazz, here with Meg Okura and the Pan Asian Chamber Ensemble.

It. Me. That is to say, of all genres, this one feels most like a part of myself. Here’s another chamber jazz favorite — Quarter Chicken Dark from The Goat Rodeo Sessions. And another — Model Trane, the first cut in this linked video by Turtle Island Quartet.

You can see and hear for yourself what makes chamber jazz different from other genres: chamber instruments used in classical music to perform jazz.

Whew, I needed this stuff. Hope you like it, too, though I know it’s not everybody’s cup of tea.

My morning was overbooked, only have time today for a few things that caught my eye.

Encryption and privacy issues

Go To Jail Indefinitely card for suspect who won’t unlock hard drives (Naked Security) — Seems odd this wasn’t the case the USDOJ used to force cracking of password-protected accounts on devices, given the circumstances surrounding a less-than-sympathetic defendant.

Amicus brief by ACLU and EFF for same case (pdf – Ars Technica)

Supreme Court ruling extends reach of FBI’s computer search under Rule 41 (Bloomberg) — Would be nice if the Email Privacy Act, now waiting for Senate approval, addressed this and limited law enforcement’s overreach.

Climate change and its secondary effects

India’s ongoing drought now affects 330 million citizens, thousands have died from heat and dehydration (Oneindia) — 330 million is slightly more people than the entire U.S. population. Imagine what could happen if even one or two percent of these affected fled the country as climate refugees.

Tiger poaching in India dramatically increased over last year (Phys.org) — Have to ask if financial stress caused by drought encouraged illegal killing of tigers, now that more tigers have been poached this year to date compared to all of last year. Are gains in tiger population now threatened by primary and secondary effects of climate change?

Though severe El Nino deepened by climate change causes record drought now, an equally deep La Nina could be ahead (Phys.org) — Which could mean dramatic rains and flooding in areas where plant growth has died off, leaving little protection from water runoff. Are any governments planning ahead even as they deal with drought?

Hope your weekend is pleasant — see you Monday morning!