The Unraveling of Brett Kavanaugh's Biggest, Dumbest Lie

[In It to Win It]

Balls & Strikes

Brett Kavanaugh really thought he’d come up with something insightful. Back in December 2021, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, widely viewed as the conservative legal movement’s best chance to overturn Roe v. Wade after five decades of trying. In an expository monologue disguised as a question for Julie Rikelman, who represented the lone remaining abortion clinic in Mississippi, Kavanaugh bemoaned that Roe had “forced” the Court “to pick sides on the most contentious social debate in American life,” rather than leaving it to “the people, to the states, or to Congress.” The Court, he suggested, could instead be “scrupulously neutral on the question of abortion, neither pro-choice nor pro-life,” and thus “return to a position of neutrality on that contentious social issue, rather than continuing to pick sides.”

When the Court released its opinion in Dobbs, Kavanaugh indeed voted to end the right to reproductive freedom, the task for which President Donald Trump had nominated him to the Court four years earlier. But in a concurrence, Kavanaugh returned once more to his favorite sets of buzzwords, reiterating his view that the Constitution is “neither pro-life nor pro-choice.” Although he professed to “greatly respect” those who disagree, the result in Dobbs, he concluded, “heeds the constitutional principle of judicial neutrality,” and “returns the issue of abortion to the people and their elected representatives.” In 12 pages, Kavanaugh extolled the virtues of “neutrality” 13 times. If his opinion were a high school civics essay, his teacher would have docked him points for repeating himself to hit the word count.

The majority opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, was similarly sanctimonious, if less performatively courteous to the people whose rights it erased. By overruling Roe and Casey, Alito wrote, the justices were extricating themselves from the messiness of setting abortion policy, and “return[ing] that authority to the people and their elected representatives.”

I do not mean to surprise you here, but as it turns out, Kavanaugh and Alito were lying. Earlier this month, the Supreme Court allowed a draconian abortion ban in Idaho to take effect, blocking a lower court order that limited a pregnant person’s right under federal law to obtain abortion care during medical emergencies. (The case should not be confused with a different decision, this one out of the ultraconservative Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, that similarly attempts to subjugate the health and safety of pregnant people to the whims of anti-choice state lawmakers.) The Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the Idaho cases, Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, sometime in April.

Link to tweet

[enough]

1. Highly recommend going to the link and reading the whole thing.

Thanks for posting this.

[keithbvadu2]

2. Remember the lie, 'settled law'.

[PTL_Mancuso]

26. It is reminiscent of the "States Rights" disregard when SCOTUS elected "W"

They can be as arbitrary as they want to be, doncha know? They got the POWER!

Can't wait to read their tortured, twisted explanation why tRump, and only tRump, is immune from any and all prosecutions-- past, present, and future.

[jaxexpat]

3. Alas, poor Brett cannot keep his lies straight.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

6. But he likes beer. He really likes beer. I heard he likes beer. He said he likes beer.

[jaxexpat]

7. He "hops" from one extreme to another.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

8. Then he's barley coherent in his lies.

[jaxexpat]

9. Ale I have to say is how challenging it is to make a pun with "pilsner".

But I have heard that weissendom comes to those wort plumb the meading of lite. So dunkel your head in a vat of brew and the USSC could be the place for you. We shall not speak of stout.

[aka-chmeee]

28. uh, how 'bout "We will allow neither pilsner doctors to terminate your pregnancy". nt/;

[jaxexpat]

29. I humbly concede the mastery of your accomplishment.

[ShazamIam]

16. The decision might be dependent on how many beers Kavanaugh had that day.

[TSExile]

4. His confirmation was the last straw...

...and that led me to stop voting R - FOREVER!!!

[Hermit-The-Prog]

5. It was never a matter of neutrality of courts; it was a matter of equality of law.

The Supremely Corrupt used the insane Dobbs decision to violate
the 1st Amendment (freedom of religion),
the 4th Amendment (freedom from illegal searches and seizures),
the 9th Amendment (non-enumerated rights),
the 13th Amendment (abolishing slavery or non-voluntary servitude),
and the really big one,
the 14th Amendment (privileges and immunities, and EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS).

[Farmer-Rick]

15. Exactly

It's equal justice. It's never been called neutral justice.

"If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor." Desmond Tutu

"Washing one’s hands of the conflict between the powerful and the powerless means to side with the powerful, not to be neutral.” – Paulo Freire

[NoMoreRepugs]

10. Fuck Brett and the horse he rode in on.

[Initech]

11. He's a colossal POS who has no business being on SCOTUS.

Fuck Mitch McConnell and Sean Hannity for helping to install him for life.

[Kali]

12. using the obnoxious term "pro-life"

is the only clue about "neutrality" ya need

[lame54]

13. You mean he doesn't like beer?

[malaise]

14. Excellent OP - must read

Last edited Fri Jan 12, 2024, 09:27 AM - Edit history (1)

Rec

[Prairie Gates]

17. Brett Kavanaugh and his buddy tried to rape a teenage girl

Just sayin'...

[TSExile]

18. ...and T**** chose him - not in spite if, but BECAUSE of the allegations.

I cannot underestimate how much the right hates women.

[elias7]

19. They HAVE to choose a side. Any appealed lower court case will force them to choose - individual choice or no choice

By Kavanaugh's reasoning, they can just overturn all the judgments regarding civil rights and women's rights and just let the US be its rampant racist and sexist self running wild, and all things he deludes himself into thinking they are social issues, when they are more accurately individual rights issues, a foundational constitutional principle.

From a strictly Solomonian standpoint, I would argue that the Supreme Court is the best vehicle to address impassable issues - wise, impartial, oathed to written but evolving principles - who better to make a decision in accordance with national identity?

[gratuitous]

20. Like the Court did in Shelby County

Shelby County was the case where the Supreme Court decided to overturn Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That section was designed to keep states with a history of discriminatory practices from changing their voting laws without first clearing the change through the Civil Rights Division. Anyone with half a brain could see that the result would be a slew of court cases trying to stop discriminatory changes in the franchise. The Court started off trying to do the job the Civil Rights Divibabision had been doing prior to Shelby County, but they got bored after a short while, and tried to foist the job off to state supreme courts with predictably discriminatory results against the voting rights of millions of citizens.

Dobbs is going to work the same way, and the Court will soon get tired of dealing with pregnant 10-year-olds and women who don't have the good sense to have a textbook gestation. The predictable result will be rising maternal and infant mortality rates.

[NNadir]

21. A regular Roger Taney, he.

[Martin68]

22. He lied though his teeth during his confirmation, so there's no surprise here. That's his standard MO.

[RobinA]

23. So, According To Him

the SC can never rule on anything, because to do so would not be "neutral." The whole job of the Court is to pick a side between two adversaries. Another fine Yale product.

[czarjak]

24. Bushie Baby

Those Secret Society members aren't really Deep State though? Without firing a shot too!

[BradBo]

25. Those two blew the SCOTUS right out of the water. They will be seen as a negative force in America from now on.

And it will only get worse for those two assholes and we American citizens. Just watch, they’ll take offense with anything that’s slightly progressive, slightly humanitarian now and start ruling as draconian as they can because they’re petulant, religious idiots.

[3catwoman3]

27. "...scrupulously neutral" my ass.

Not even close.