Cavenaugh is one of the worst possible choices

My Recent Posts

Cavenaugh will never turn into a traitor like Souter, but this is one of the worst possible choices on the list of 25, only slightly better than Hardiman. If you haven't researched him, he has made some of the worst judgements of a non-Obama judge in recent years, including but not limited to being the first judge who claimed obamacare was a "tax" which Roberts used twice to uphold it.

 

As a judge you don't write the law, you don't "interpret the intention" of the law, you read the plain text and asume what it says it what it means. you don't make it up as you go along. He has to rule according to the constitution, not according to the law he is being asked to "interpret".

 

Ben Shapiro laid out the case of decision after decision that was wrong and anti-constitutional that Cavenaugh has made in a podecast today, you should check it out.

Comments

EXPAT Added Jul 10, 2018 - 8:25pm
Did you write this crap before or after the choice was made? You post a preconceived opinion without a single example of mal practice.
 
Ryan Messano Added Jul 10, 2018 - 8:45pm
Cavenaugh (sic)
Luther Wu Added Jul 10, 2018 - 9:08pm
"Ben Shapiro laid out the case of decision after decision that was wrong..."
---
Did you actually set out to shell your own position?
Thomas Sutrina Added Jul 10, 2018 - 9:23pm
Ken welcome to WB.  Most of the authors that start off like you do not follow the requirements of participating.  You need to comment on other articles and follow up on this one.
 
Ken, I do not understand you logic<<first judge who claimed obamacare was a "tax">>  The supreme court upheld that Obamacare was a tax even without the actual statement in the bill that it was a tax.   HOW CAN CAVENAUGH SUPPORTING THE DECISION YOU WANT  MAKE HIM THE WORSE CANDIDATE ON THE LIST.  NO OTHER CANDIDATE DID THIS?
 
I expect for you, Ken, to explain what many on WB see as illogical.  
 
Again Ken, you seem to be very illogical <<As a judge you don't write the law, >>  Now I listened to Cavenaugh and Trump and every person that has reviewed him as someone that will not write laws from the bench.    Again Ken please give us an explanation.  
 
So Ken please explain this illogical statement since the 'Constitution' is itself a LAW.  <<He has to rule according to the constitution, not according to the law>>  Congress by the Constitution only has the power to create laws, Ken.  An executive action is not a law and a regulation is not a law unless it is attached to a Congress passed law. 
 
Thus the president can temporally restrict or allow immigration.  And that power has to have a reason for swift action because it harms the citizens.  Ken open borders harms citizens because they break the laws. 
 
It is a good idea to provide the link to articles. 
 
Good luck Ken.   
Ken King Added Jul 11, 2018 - 12:11am
ExPat, I wrote this shortly after the announcement.  There are some things that Kavenaugh has done very well on, especially the 2nd Amendment and Administrative law (particularly being adverse to the Chevron decision), but there are also some things he has done very poorly on.  He is the first to claim that the individual mandate "fee" was a tax, which Roberts than used not once but twice to rewrite the law (which was my entire point in the middle section about that is not the job of the judicial branch of government, that is the legislative job).  Another example is he doesn't understand what can be used to impeach a president. 
 
His own comment about it flies in the face of the constitutional "high crimes and misdemeanors" requirement.
 
A third issue is he believe law enforcement can do a whole lot of searching without a warrant.  he was on the dissent of the case where law enforcement placed GPS tracker on vehicle of someone without a warrant and said that was ok because the information gathered wasn't specific enough.
 
There are others, but there wasn't just one that drove that comment when there was a list of 25 where he may be the easiest to confirm for the midterms and get another win in to help the republicans, but far from the best choice.
 
this should also answer some of the other responders about my issues with Kavenaugh.  He won't be a disaster like Souter from GHWB, but he there are a lot of questions about his interpretations
Ken King Added Jul 11, 2018 - 12:21am
@Luther - that comment was originally posted as a response to a user on another site, and was asked to be brought here.  I am not parroting someone else, I was simply giving a reference because in the particular podcast, Ben Shapiro (prior to the selection) was going through best/worst rulings of the top 4 candidates, and he was going through Kavenaugh on a number of cases where the rulings strayed very far from the constitution, and that is concerning, and why I consider him one of the worst choices.
 
I am not looking for a "conservative" justice.  I am looking nfor an "originalist" or a "textualist".  One who doesn't read things into what isn't there, and make it up to support their position, but reads what is there and assume they said what they mean and mean what they said and the decide whether that is constitutional or not.
Luther Wu Added Jul 11, 2018 - 1:14am
@ Ken,
Many of us came here the same way you did.
While Ben Shapiro has shown skill at argument against untenable positions, his opinions no longer carry any weight with me.
I haven't researched Judge Kavanaugh's positions enough to form my own opinions.
Welcome aboard.
If you stay around long enough, you will find about as wide a range of opinion, personality and capability here, as anywhere.
 
 
Ken King Added Jul 11, 2018 - 1:47am
Understood Luther, wasn't asking you to refer to his opinions, simply the fact of the cases he was presenting that Kavenaugh wrote opinions on.  Some are very good, some are very concerning.
Dino Manalis Added Jul 11, 2018 - 8:51am
 Justices decide specific cases, no one knows what he'll decide in a future case!
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 11, 2018 - 9:22am
A  typical canned response recited by minions of the rabid left. It could apply to anybody considered to SCOTUS.
 
Trump's Choice: live with it. 
Luther Wu Added Jul 11, 2018 - 9:29am
ryck said-
"A  typical canned response recited by minions of the rabid left. It could apply to anybody considered to SCOTUS.
 
Trump's Choice: live with it. "
----
While few would call Shapiro a Lefty, he hangs with Bill Kristol, et al, (and can go hang with them,) which means he is in league with the Left, these days.
 
It  is a mistake for me to even mention terms of Left and Right.
It's the established power structure vs. the people.
Shapiro has thrown in with the wrong side of that equation.
Thomas Sutrina Added Jul 11, 2018 - 3:02pm
Ken king, It seems that the responses to other people suggested that I took your initial article different then intended.  I you added your responses to the article I would have gotten a clearer picture. 
 
Trump has shown that he chooses middle of the road people.  Cavenaugh is the classic middle of the road that believes in interpreting the Constitution that activist creating law from thin air.   Cavenaugh is actually close to the person he replaces.  So your saying Trump made a bad choice but you need to judge with an understanding of Trump.  He made the best choice that Trump would make and I think that the order of his choices was known a year ago before the first pick.  Cavenaugh will be harder to attack by the Democrats, they will do it.  And the Dem votes needed will be hard pressed to not say yes.
 
The court will lean more conservative then we have had in half a century by anyone of the 25 candidates.   As a Constitutional Conservative I see this as one of many steps needed to return America to the original path.  With the conservative branch of GOP hanging on by their finger tips while the swamp creatures stomp on those fingers tips just having a pick from the list is a win.
 
Thomas Sutrina Added Jul 11, 2018 - 3:10pm
Trump could get a third pick.  The choice will be driven by the 2018 and 2020 election with 2022 having a slight effect if the senate is lost.    Some say the 300 decisions he has made will provide lots of fuel for the Democratic attack.  but he is a Washington insider and is liked by the swamp.  
Ken Added Jul 11, 2018 - 5:19pm
Thomas - Gorsuch was not a middle of the road pick, he was a strict textualist/originalist.  Kavenaugh is not.  Kavenaugh is the one who first defined the individual mandate "fee" as a tax, which not only the law never defines it as, but also the Obama administration for years specifically stated it wasn't - until they saw that the courts would keep the law (thanks to Kavenaugh) if they started calling it a tax.  He also thinks warrantless GPS tracking is ok as he dissented with the majority who said putting a gps tracker on your vehicle requires a warrant.  His views on impeachment also are not based in the constitution at all.
 
the goal is not to replace "with someone similar" it is to replace with someone who will defend the constitution.  I would never want Ginsberg or SotoMayor or Bryer replaced by "someone similar" as they are all leftist judicial activists who rule based on their ideological beliefs, not the constitution.
Flying Junior Added Jul 12, 2018 - 1:32am
I like your spelling.  Cave-enough.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 12, 2018 - 9:33am
Tear down the remnants of the phony Warren Court and attendant lackeys. 
Thomas Sutrina Added Jul 12, 2018 - 1:49pm
Ken, Trump I believe knew who his two supreme court judges would be when Gorsuch was picked.  He was a late addition or on only one of the two list providers.    So put the harder to seat up first and the easier one second.  Trump counts WINS.  He doesn't count quality of the win.  Kavenaugh is a win an that is all that Trump ever has been concerned with.  He is in that zone of acceptable to all parties, poor but acceptable.    Your right about him.  If you wanted a better pick then you need a better president.
My guess is that he doesn't have a third candidate.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 12, 2018 - 3:17pm
"My guess is that he doesn't have a third candidate."
 
He has 24 more.............
Ken Added Jul 12, 2018 - 3:34pm
Thomas, I agree with you to an extent, but he had lots of others, and in fact, Amy Coney Barrett was confirmed by this same congress last year at the circuit level and would have been a stellar choice.  Mike Lee would have been a great choice - many in the senate would love to push him out. His brother, also on Trump's list is a very distinguished jurist on the Utah supreme court.  There were a number of picks he could have made.
 
Fortunately, he will almost certainly get at least 1 more pick, and if re-elected in 2020 he will very likely get at least 2 more, maybe 3.  If he is re-elected in 2020, I would bet that RBG is extremely unlikely to last another 6 years.  I would bet that if Trump is president that Clarence Thomas would retire in 2022 or 2023 to be sure he is replace by someone similar and not wait for next president.  Breyer is also getting up there.
 
We could have a true constitutionally based court for a generation if that were to happen, and gives some long term hope for returning to a constitutionally based country and getting away from some of the craziness of the past couple of decades.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 13, 2018 - 7:59am
"...and gives some long term hope for returning to a constitutionally based country "
 
How refreshing...........
Flying Junior Added Jul 14, 2018 - 2:32am
The remnants of the Warren Court
 
Man!  You know your RW crazy down pat.  You scare me, except that you are just a nutcase without any power.
rycK the JFK Democrat Added Jul 14, 2018 - 3:07pm
Warren was a racist and a pig.

Recent Articles by Writers Ken follows.