Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) stood with other Democrats in the Senate on Tuesday as they denounced the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to fill the empty seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. (Photo: @SenKamalaHarris)
Why I Will Oppose Brett Kavanaugh's Nomination to the Supreme Court
Trump's pick represents a direct and fundamental threat to the court's promise to ensure "Equal Justice Under the Law"
The Supreme Court has a profound impact on the rights -- and lives -- of all Americans. When at its best, it has advanced the meaning of those words above its doors, 'Equal Justice Under Law.' At its worst, the Supreme Court has upheld racial segregation, enabled voter suppression, and equated corporations with people. Whether or a not the Supreme Court enforces the spirit of those words, 'Equal Justice Under Law,' is determined by the individuals who sit on that Court.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh represents a direct and fundamental threat to that promise of equality and so I will oppose his nomination to the Supreme Court. Specifically, as a replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy, his nomination presents an existential threat to the health care of hundreds of millions of Americans.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, President Trump made clear that he had a litmus test for Supreme Court Justices -- overturn Roe v. Wade and oppose a woman's constitutionally-protected right to make her own health care decisions. The President then released a list of nominees who had been vetted to meet that test. Judge Kavanaugh is on that list.
Judge Kavanaugh has consistently proven to be a conservative ideologue instead of a mainstream jurist. As recently as last year, he disregarded Supreme Court precedent and opposed the health care rights of a vulnerable young woman. That ruling was overturned by a sitting of all the judges on his court. In 2015, Kavanaugh wrote that an employer, based on their personal beliefs, can deny their employee access to birth control coverage.
I know personally just how consequential this seat on the Supreme Court is. Almost two decades after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, I was part of only the second class to integrate the Berkeley, California public schools. If that Court had not issued that unanimous opinion led by Chief Justice Earl Warren in that case argued by Thurgood Marshall, I likely would not have become a lawyer, or a prosecutor, or a been elected district attorney, or the Attorney General of California. And I certainly would not have become a United States Senator.
That's the power an individual Supreme Court Justice holds. Those are the stakes of this nomination. We must demand a mainstream jurist worthy of our great country.
We are at a crossroads
This country and this world are at a monumental crossroads. In a few short weeks, US voters will have an opportunity to beat back the forces of fascism and confront the billionaires who are rigging the economy, our media system, and our democracy, making it increasingly impossible for ordinary people to get by. We’re not just talking about the election. We’re talking about what must be done once these fascist elements are vanquished from power. We need a bolder set of solutions than what either major party has so far been willing to offer and a working-class movement ready to fight like hell for it. Trump didn't emerge from nowhere. The conditions that fueled MAGA authoritarianism were created by decades of radical neoliberal economic policies and a corrupt political system dominated by corporate interests. They slashed taxes on the super-rich, promising that the benefits would trickle down. They said giveaways to the corporate titans would make life more affordable for the rest of us. It was all bullshit. And when a bitter, betrayed populace searches for someone to blame, right-wing demagogues have little trouble finding scapegoats. People know when they're being lied to, but you won't hear any of this from the corporate media. Only independent journalism—powered and funded by people who believe in building a better world—can deliver truly trustworthy daily news. Our Fall Campaign is underway, and we need your help. To power our newsroom through the rest of the year, we need to raise $125,000 by midnight on October 31. So if you share our vision, please contribute whatever you can to sustain our work. |
The Supreme Court has a profound impact on the rights -- and lives -- of all Americans. When at its best, it has advanced the meaning of those words above its doors, 'Equal Justice Under Law.' At its worst, the Supreme Court has upheld racial segregation, enabled voter suppression, and equated corporations with people. Whether or a not the Supreme Court enforces the spirit of those words, 'Equal Justice Under Law,' is determined by the individuals who sit on that Court.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh represents a direct and fundamental threat to that promise of equality and so I will oppose his nomination to the Supreme Court. Specifically, as a replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy, his nomination presents an existential threat to the health care of hundreds of millions of Americans.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, President Trump made clear that he had a litmus test for Supreme Court Justices -- overturn Roe v. Wade and oppose a woman's constitutionally-protected right to make her own health care decisions. The President then released a list of nominees who had been vetted to meet that test. Judge Kavanaugh is on that list.
Judge Kavanaugh has consistently proven to be a conservative ideologue instead of a mainstream jurist. As recently as last year, he disregarded Supreme Court precedent and opposed the health care rights of a vulnerable young woman. That ruling was overturned by a sitting of all the judges on his court. In 2015, Kavanaugh wrote that an employer, based on their personal beliefs, can deny their employee access to birth control coverage.
I know personally just how consequential this seat on the Supreme Court is. Almost two decades after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, I was part of only the second class to integrate the Berkeley, California public schools. If that Court had not issued that unanimous opinion led by Chief Justice Earl Warren in that case argued by Thurgood Marshall, I likely would not have become a lawyer, or a prosecutor, or a been elected district attorney, or the Attorney General of California. And I certainly would not have become a United States Senator.
That's the power an individual Supreme Court Justice holds. Those are the stakes of this nomination. We must demand a mainstream jurist worthy of our great country.
The Supreme Court has a profound impact on the rights -- and lives -- of all Americans. When at its best, it has advanced the meaning of those words above its doors, 'Equal Justice Under Law.' At its worst, the Supreme Court has upheld racial segregation, enabled voter suppression, and equated corporations with people. Whether or a not the Supreme Court enforces the spirit of those words, 'Equal Justice Under Law,' is determined by the individuals who sit on that Court.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh represents a direct and fundamental threat to that promise of equality and so I will oppose his nomination to the Supreme Court. Specifically, as a replacement for Justice Anthony Kennedy, his nomination presents an existential threat to the health care of hundreds of millions of Americans.
During the 2016 presidential campaign, President Trump made clear that he had a litmus test for Supreme Court Justices -- overturn Roe v. Wade and oppose a woman's constitutionally-protected right to make her own health care decisions. The President then released a list of nominees who had been vetted to meet that test. Judge Kavanaugh is on that list.
Judge Kavanaugh has consistently proven to be a conservative ideologue instead of a mainstream jurist. As recently as last year, he disregarded Supreme Court precedent and opposed the health care rights of a vulnerable young woman. That ruling was overturned by a sitting of all the judges on his court. In 2015, Kavanaugh wrote that an employer, based on their personal beliefs, can deny their employee access to birth control coverage.
I know personally just how consequential this seat on the Supreme Court is. Almost two decades after the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, I was part of only the second class to integrate the Berkeley, California public schools. If that Court had not issued that unanimous opinion led by Chief Justice Earl Warren in that case argued by Thurgood Marshall, I likely would not have become a lawyer, or a prosecutor, or a been elected district attorney, or the Attorney General of California. And I certainly would not have become a United States Senator.
That's the power an individual Supreme Court Justice holds. Those are the stakes of this nomination. We must demand a mainstream jurist worthy of our great country.