AP Photo
Last Saturday, in a nail-bitingly close vote of 50-48, the Senate confirmed the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh as an Associate Justice of the United States to replace former Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, who retired in July. Senator Joe Manchin III of West Virginia was the only Democrat to vote yes on Kavanaugh. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska announced her intention before the confirmation that she would vote no, the only Republican to do so, but due to the absence of fellow Senator Steve Daines of Montana who intended to vote yes, as a courtesy to him Murkowski voted an effectively neutral "present," as a no vote from her wouldn't affect the outcome of the final vote. The rest of the senators voted the same within their respective parties, allowing the Republican majority to prevail.
This is a huge win for Republicans, as by replacing the "swing vote" Kennedy with a more consistent conservative in Kavanaugh, there is now a conservative majority in the Supreme Court and therefore in all three branches of government. It is clear that the Republicans voted out of the interest of their party, even if any of them may have even slightly believed Dr. Ford's testimony. They will only continue their efforts to consolidate conservative power in the future, which should prompt Democrats to act quickly. Unless they can mobilize most of their party in the electorate to vote in the midterms, the Republicans will continue to have their way, as they have the majority in government.
Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/06/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court.html
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/playbook/2018/10/07/kavanaugh-confirmed-322510
3 comments:
After watching the hearing, the confirmation surprised me. Regardless of whether or one believes the allegations of sexual assault are true, the way Kavanaugh conducted himself during the hearing in no way represents the behavior of a Supreme Court justice. I think the fact that Senators were able to overlook this in favor of putting a conservative justice on the Court speaks to the increasingly partisan politics of the U.S. that we discussed in class.
I agree with Claire's point about Kavanaugh's conduct in court. In my opinion, Kavanaugh's testimony could be an AP English exam question-- looking at the transcript, there are just so many rhetorical devices used in his speech to make his point believable. I think this rhetoric was unnecessary -- there was no need to convince people that what he was saying was true because he swore under oath to tell the truth. Furthermore, the way he behaved in court, only added to his rhetoric purpose of swaying opinions. It would be very ironic and dangerous if a position that interprets truth was given to someone who doesn't even accept it.
I was also shocked with the outcome of Kavanaugh's hearing. I think its very sad that anyone going into the Supreme Court should even have an allegation like this at all. If it is true that he committed this crime, it would be so unfortunate that someone willing to lie under oath would make it to the Supreme Court, where they will be a judge for life. And now with a Conservative majority in all 3 branches, the Republicans will be able to get a lot of policy in place for their party.
Post a Comment