In today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, former Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy made the case for his
needing to retire in a bizarre rant against “his friend” current Senate
Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and the Senate Judiciary Committee over
the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh. Leahy
talked about “wandering in the woods” and compared the hearing to his childhood
love of “Alice in Wonderland.” In other
parts he made some outlandish claims that made him look like he was in some
sort of fantasy woods created by Lewis Carroll.
One example. Leahy
said:
“When I was Chairman . . .[we] requested the full universe of Justice Kagan’s documents. . . . We received 99% of them.”
As Chairman Grassley pointed out,
“The [Judiciary] Committee did not receive 99% of Justice Kagan’s record; we did not get her Solicitor General records.”
Leahy made all kinds of other accusations over the number
of records turned over. It is apparent
that no number would be enough.
Putting aside the debate over numbers of documents, there
is the more important debate over relevancy.
It seems all rational observers would agree the most relevant part of Brett Kavanaugh’s record for determining if Judge Kavanaugh is fit to be a
Supreme Court Justice is his time as an appellate court judge.
Among those who agreed with this rational standard in the
past is Senator Leahy. In 2009 during
the confirmation hearing for Justice Sotomayor, it was Senator
Leahy who said:
“In truth, we do not have to speculate about what kind of a Justice she will be because we have seen the kind of judge she has been.”
Sotomayor had one less year then Judge Kavanaugh on the Court
of Appeals at the time of her confirmation (although more time as a
judge). It seems like 2018
Senator Leahy should listen to 2009 Senator Leahy and review Judge Kavanaugh’s
judicial record. If he left the woods of wonderland,
he would realize that would give him what he needs.
No comments:
Post a Comment