[ad_1]
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, President Trump's candidate for the Supreme Court, has spent the last twelve years embracing the philosophy of the conservative legal movement by setting a record on the powerful Federal District Court of Appeals. Columbia Circuit.
On issues as diverse as abortion and firearms law on national security policies and trade regulations, Justice Kavanaugh emphasized textual restrictions while favoring corporations over regulators. With a few exceptions, his style is typically conservative.
Of course, Judge Kavanaugh's story is not a perfect guide to the approach he would pursue if he was confirmed to fill the vacancy created by the the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, for whom he has already worked. Judges of courts of appeal are required to obey Supreme Court precedents, but judges are free to vote to overturn previous decisions.
Yet the judge's record – especially in cases where he does not agree with him. if the Senate confirms it.
Here are some of the issues and notable cases that he has touched on. Many of them arose from disputes over the scope and limits of the federal government's power
Abortion Rights
In one case last fall that drew the 39, general attention, the court of appeal voted to allow an undocumented woman. aged one and a half years in detention at an immigration center to request an abortion without delay; The Trump administration had initially wanted to transfer her to an adult sponsor for advice.
Kavanaugh J. was dissenting. He wrote that while the court of appeal was required to obey Supreme Court decisions that stipulated that the Constitution protects a woman's right to choose an abortion, these precedents allowed the government to Apply "reasonable rules that do not impose an excessive burden". 19659005] He argued that the government was within its limits to choose a transfer to a sponsor instead of "forcing the minor to make the decision in an isolated detention camp without available support network." Kavanaugh J. charged the majority To invent a new right for illegal immigrant minors in US government detention to obtain immediate abortion on request. "He said the government prevented him from intervening to connect the miners with their immigration sponsors before making such a serious life decision." The majority's decision represents a radical extension of the court's jurisprudence. Supreme Court on Abortion, "he wrote
Religion
Judge Kavanaugh disagreed with his colleagues in a case concerning part of the Affordable Care Act to cover contraception Under the law, employers must provide insurance to their workers or pay a fine.But employers who oppose contraception for religious reasons can circumvent the requirement by submitting a form to their employees. insurers, who then cover workers' contraception at no cost to employers.
Some religious organizations disputed this arrangement, making them complicit in contraception. The appeal dismissed their argument, and the court of appeal decided not to rehear it – against the objections of Judge Kavanaugh.
Forcing employers to submit the form violated their religious freedom, but he recognized a precedent of the Supreme Court. The same result could be obtained, he argued, if employers only had to inform the government of their objections and let the government negotiate. Separately, in a 2010 case, some atheists challenged the saying of a prayer during presidential inaugurations and the phrase "then help me God" in the office's presidential oath. A panel of three judges dismissed the complaint. But while the other two judges were content to say that the plaintiffs did not have standing, Kavanaugh J. weighed on the merits.
He upheld the practice as constitutional, citing the principle that religious speech or government-sponsored prayer at public events where prayers were traditionally said did not violate the prohibition of public worship. Establishing the religion of the First Amendment, as long as the prayers are not proselytes "
Gun Rights
Judge Kavanaugh adopted a position more favorable to the rights of firearms than his colleagues in a case of 2011 due to a challenge of a District of Columbia law the owners of firearms to register and prohibit the possession of semi-automatic rifles. Although the Court of Appeal upheld the constitutionally permissible limits under the Second Amendment, Kavanaugh J. dissented.
He wrote that although the government could ban automatic submachine guns, the ban on semi-automatic rifles should be unconstitutional because they "have not been traditionally prohibited and are commonly used by law-abiding citizens to defend themselves at home, He also said that because registration was not traditionally required for all legally owned weapons, this rule should also be annulled. [19659009] Presidential Control of Agencies
Judge Kavanaugh also expressed his skepticism about small arms and it is proposed by the Congress to allow executive agencies to operate with some degree of independence vis-à-vis The White House In a 2008 case, the Court of Appeals upheld the structure of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, whose members were appointed by the a Securities and Exchange Commission and could only be revoked by the S.E.C for a good cause. But Judge Kavanaugh has filed a dissenting opinion, saying that she "effectively eliminates any presidential power to control" the regulatory and law enforcement functions of the council.
Later, the Supreme Court agreed with him to vote 5 against 4 board members – but not the appointment provisions. Earlier this year, his appeals court upheld a law that limits the president's discretion to dismiss the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Board, which has a fixed five-year term and can only be removed for one reason. valid. Judge Kavanaugh argued that it was unconstitutional to confer on the director such independence from the control of the White House
Terrorism Detainees
In several important cases brought by detainees from Guantánamo Bay Judge Kavanaugh sits on the government side. In habeas corpus cases, for example, he has widely interpreted the power of the military to detain people in custody in wartime even when evidence of their alleged links to terrorism is relatively weak.
Voting Rights
In October 2012, Judge Kavanaugh was part of a panel of three judges that was considering a South Carolina law generally requiring that voters present a photo ID issued by the government to cast a ballot. At the time, the Voting Rights Act required jurisdictions with a history of discrimination, such as South Carolina, to obtain federal authorization before amending the election rules to ensure that the amendments would not would not disproportionately suppress the minority participation rate. (The Supreme Court sabotaged this guarantee the following year.)
The Department of Justice prevented South Carolina from enforcing its law, noting that about 6-8% of electors African-Americans in the state did not have an identity card. about 4% of white voters. Judge Kavanaugh's panel prevented the state from enforcing its law for this year's elections, but maintained its use in future elections to give time to educate voters on the necessity. Judge Kavanaugh wrote that he was pleased with the promise made by the South Carolina authorities to make exceptions for voters who gave a reason for not having a photo ID, saying that the law did not have the expected and feared effects. Settlement of Cases
Judge Kavanaugh repeatedly challenged the authority of administrative agencies when they issue regulations challenged by industry. In an article of the law he denigrated what is called Chevron deference, the doctrine that courts should rely on the interpretation of their power by an agency when A law is ambiguous, provided that the interpretation is reasonable. In some cases, he was less willing than his colleagues to decide that agencies had the power, under the law, to regulate a subject that Congress had not anticipated. Last year, he opposed a decision upholding the Internet neutrality rules of the Federal Communications Commission of the Obama era, to which the telecom companies opposed [19659002] and he adopted a skeptical approach on several occasions. the use of an air quality law developed before climate change has become a major political concern. In a 2012 case in which an appeal court upheld some regulations on greenhouse gases dating back to the Obama era, for example, Justice Kavanaugh issued a dissenting opinion, making argue that the EPA had exceeded the authority that Congress had granted him. "The task of managing global warming is urgent and important," he writes, but "a court's assessment of the agency's compliance with statutory limits does not depend on the good policy of the agency or agency. the agency's praiseworthy intentions ". [19659034
In a 2011 case challenging a law that prohibited foreign nationals – legally but temporarily in the United States – to spend money on campaigns, Judge Kavanaugh confirmed the restriction, but he interpreted it restrictively as applying only to expenses for advertisements that specifically advocate that people vote for or against a particular candidate, and his interpretation suggested that he might be more skeptical about the legal limits on spending on advertisements that deal with topics without explicitly urging people to vote in a manner that particular.
Source link
