[ad_1]
The Senate's fight against Brett Kavanaugh is finally over, but legal experts say the battle for murderous confirmations could have a lasting effect on his career at the Supreme Court and the public's perception of him.
Kavanaugh's Accused Response to Allegations of Sexual Assault, in which he accused Democrats of orchestrating a political coup fueled by "an apparently hidden anger President Trump
Donald John TrumpA lucky man becomes viral after complaining about calling himself Brett Kavanagh A UN report predicts catastrophic consequences if greenhouse gas emissions are not reduced. here 2030 Kanye West leaves social media amid comments favorable to Trump PLUS and the 2016 election "and" Clinton's Revenge "have raised concerns among some forensic observers as to the influence that his anger could have on his behavior at the hearing, and if that is the case. Would prevent to be an independent and impartial justice.
Jeffrey Rachlinski, a professor at Cornell Law School, has studied the influence of human psychology on the decision-making process of judges. Research shows that judges react to their emotional state.
"There is really no study that works the other way," he said. "Whenever researchers look for emotional influence on judges, we see an effect."
Rachlinski said that it was hard to imagine how the confirmation process of Kavanaugh could not affect him.
"This is the central event in the life of a judge of the Supreme Court," he said. "Every federal judge who goes through the confirmation process remembers every detail – a traumatic event is something that is remembered very well."
Many have already made comparisons between Kavanaugh's hearing confirmation hearings and those of Clarence Thomas J., whose appointment was quashed when Anita Hill accused him of sexual harassment. But Rachlinski said that these similarities could also extend to his life on the bench.
"Judge Thomas, according to all accounts, is still very bitter," he said. "Even after decades of Supreme Court record, he is still very angry."
In his 2007 memoir entitled "My grandfather's son", he presented his first detailed comments on the scandal that threatened to derail his appointment.
"The crowd I was facing now did not carry any ropes or rifles," he wrote, recounting the 1991 hearings. "His weapons were plain-language lies spoken in microphones and printed on the front pages of the American newspapers. "
"A simple confirmation, even to the Supreme Court, seemed like a pitiful compensation for what had been done to me," he added near the end of the 289-page book.
Some say that Thomas's resentment is one of the reasons he never speaks in court arguments – although he has given various explanations over the years for his silence – and why his appearances in public are only intended for to conservative audiences.
"Some judges can not shake the asterisk," said Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and opinion contributor at The Hill. "Thomas did not do it and I do not think Kavanaugh will do it, it will be part of the indelible record of his career."
Turley said that Kavanaugh would be likely to feel resentment with regard to the confirmation process.
"The anger you saw at the confirmation of charges hearing was honest and understandable, he said. I think everyone would feel a sense of lasting hurt and resentment at the way they were treated. I think it's human. "
Kavanaugh has since picked up some of the remarks he made during the special Senate hearing, including Christine Blasey Ford, who accused him of sexually assaulting her at a party in 1982, when they were both in high school.
A week after the hearing, he made the unusual decision to write an opinion piece for the the Wall Street newspaper, recognizing that he was perhaps "sometimes too emotional" and that he had said some things that he should not have had.
Kavanaugh said his response reflected the overwhelming frustration of being wrongly accused.
But this sentiment will not be short-lived, according to Daniel Epps, an associate professor of law at the University of Washington Law School.
"It will certainly have a big impact on the rest of his life and the way he sees himself and others see him," Epps said, pointing to the possible effects on how he decides cases in the Supreme Court.
"One could say that he might well want to try to restore his reputation, or that it would make him really frustrated by the left and that he's really conservative," said Epps, adding that his case law could also be spared.
Turley, however, stated that he did not expect Kavanaugh to deviate from his judicial philosophy when he succeeded former Justice Anthony Kennedy.
"People who anticipate a grotesque transformation do not really know Brett Kavanaugh's track record," said Turley. "He was already at Justice Kennedy's right. There is not much further, you can go right when you are at this place. "
Kavanaugh should be on the bench Tuesday for the pleadings. The court, which began its last term on October 1, is closed Monday on the occasion of Columbus Day.
For John Paul Stevens, retired Supreme Court Justice of the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh's public anger at the Senate hearing is likely to cause him to lose his seat in the High Court for life.
Stevens, who was appointed by President Ford, said in public that Kavanaugh's performance suggested that he lacked the temperament needed to meet the job requirements, according to the Palm Beach Post.
Although it remains to be seen how Kavanaugh will react, some say that he has already shown a level of bias that will be difficult to forget.
"I think there will be at least an impression that it is unlikely that it gives some groups the same level of consideration," said Carolyn Shapiro, associate professor of law and co-director of the Institute at the US Supreme Court. at the Chicago-Kent College of Law.
Shapiro, who has joined more than 2400 other law professors in a letter Opponents of Kavanaugh's candidacy, said the likely cases to pose a problem are those in which groups aligned democratically contest a Republican-backed action. She cited as an example the case of gerrymandering supporters of North Carolina who returns to court.
While legal experts say that outside groups are likely to ask him to withdraw from certain cases, the Supreme Court's rules indicate that each judge decides whether his challenge is justified.
"They are not subject to any authority other than theirs," said Epps.
[ad_2]
Source link
