By Tyler Bauer
I wrote recently on the Democrats’ strategy for opposing Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. This strategy consisted of using uncorroborated sexual assault claims in an attempt to paint Kavanaugh as a serial rapist. For more on that, click here.
Ultimately, the Democrats failed, Kavanaugh was confirmed, and he sat on the nation’s highest court for the first time yesterday. Now that we know the Democrats failed in stopping Kavanaugh’s confirmation, here are a few strategies that I think would’ve fared better.
In my opinion, the best way to stop Kavanaugh from joining the Supreme Court would’ve been questioning his stance on gun rights. On the surface, Kavanaugh seems like a pro-gun judge, and, for the most part, he is a pro-gun judge. However, Kavanaugh has publicly stated that concealed carry is not a constitutional right, claiming carrying a concealed weapons falls outside the scope of the Second Amendment.
I’m not surprised that Kavanaugh holds such an opinion, but I am surprised that he’d admit it so publicly. The belief that concealed carry falls outside the scope of the Second Amendment is completely unsupported. According to the text of the Second Amendment, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Prohibiting bearing concealed arms would be an obvious infringement. Nowhere within the Second Amendment is concealment explicitly mentioned or implicitly implied.
Painting Kavanaugh as an anti-Second Amendment judge – or, at the very least, as a weak Second Amendment judge – would’ve been much more successful in convincing Republicans to oppose Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh’s refusal to uphold the Second Amendment – one of the most well-known and widely-supported parts of the Constitution – should disqualify him from being a judge.
Another strategy that could’ve been used to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation is his stance on government spying. The Democratic Party – which prides itself on being the party of civil liberties and personal freedom – made a major mistake in ignoring Kavanaugh’s defiance of the Fourth Amendment.
In a recent case, Kavanaugh said, “In my view, the Government’s metadata collection program is entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment.” The government’s metadata collect program is a program in which all of your data – such as phone call history, locations, etc. – is collected in bulk by the government. The Fourth Amendment, on the other hand, protects all persons from unreasonable searches and seizures. The government’s metadata collection program seizes your information for no legitimate reason at all. There’s no warrant, no ability to protest the collection, and no way for you to know what is done with your data.
Either Kavanaugh doesn’t understand the Fourth Amendment, or he simply does not care about our Fourth Amendment rights. Either way, this should disqualify him from holding any position in government.
Ties to the George W. Bush Administration
Admittedly, this may be the weakest of the three strategies, but I think even this strategy would’ve had a better chance of succeeding than the uncorroborated sexual assault claims.
Before becoming a judge, Kavanaugh worked in the White House as a member of George W. Bush’s administration. Being tied to Bush erases any possibility of Kavanaugh being an unbiased, impartial judge. To be fair to the Democrats, this was brought up early in the process. However, it was abandoned in favor of the sexual assault claims. Had the Democrats stuck with this strategy and painted Kavanaugh as being incapable of judging impartially, I think they would’ve had more success.
Additionally, as associate counsel to President George W. Bush, Kavanaugh assisted in the process of drafting and passing the USA PATRIOT Act. I have no idea how the Democrats managed to downplay – if not totally ignore – this fact. Not only is this proof of Kavanaugh’s bias, it also proves that he has a long track record of opposing privacy rights.