Kavanaugh Didn't Help Dispel Image of Justices as 'Junior Varsity Politicians'
His conspiratorial tirade last week drew rebukes from the left and the right, undermining the effort of the justices to promote themselves as nonpartisan. Kavanaugh took to the WSJ to promise to be fair and independent.
October 05, 2018 at 11:29 AM
7 minute read
The justices of the U.S. Supreme Court have never been the “team of nine” described, over and over, by Brett Kavanaugh last month at the start of his confirmation proceedings. But they have been a team of naysayers to charges that the court is a partisan institution, an argument made more difficult by Kavanaugh himself.
Kavanaugh last week angrily denounced sexual misconduct allegations against him as being part of a “calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election” and “revenge on behalf of the Clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.” He added: “As we all know in the United States political system, what goes around comes around.”
His conspiratorial tirade drew rebukes from the left and the right, and last night, Kavanaugh tried to restore his image as a nonpartisan judge. Writing in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, he acknowledged he said some things that he wished he had not. Retired Justice John Paul Stevens, speaking in Florida on Thursday, said Kavanaugh's performance last week marked him unfit for the Supreme Court.
Many of the justices in recent years have raised concerns about how the bitter confirmation fights between Senate Republicans and Democrats over the Supreme Court damage the public perception of the court as nonpartisan. Kavanaugh's language and demeanor didn't help the “team of nine” dispel that notion.
And the sitting justices themselves sometimes say and do things that go against their effort to wipe away the perception of the court as partisan.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg apologized in 2015 for her comments in an interview in which she called then-candidate Trump a “faker” who “says whatever comes into his head at the moment.”
Justice Neil Gorsuch was criticized for a speaking engagement at the Trump Hotel in Washington, and for going on a congratulatory post-confirmation tour in Kentucky with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.
But by and large, most of the justices have taken strides to promote an image of themselves as neutral arbiters of the law. Here are comments by the justices on how they view themselves and their court.
>> “When you have a sharply political, divisive hearing process, it increases the danger that whoever comes out of it will be viewed in those terms. If the Democrats and Republicans have been fighting so furiously about whether you're going to be confirmed, it's natural for some member of the public to think, well, you must be identified in a particular way as a result of that process. And that's just not how—we don't work as Democrats or Republicans.” —Chief Justice John Roberts Jr., 2016 Law Day speech.
>> “There's no such thing as a Republican judge or a Democratic judge. We just have judges in this country.” —Justice Neil Gorsuch, 2017 Senate confirmation hearings.
>> “That's an unfortunate thing because it makes the world think we are sort of junior varsity politicians. I think that's not the way we think of ourselves, even given the fact that we disagree and that we disagree sometimes in ways that you can predict based on what kind of a president appointed us. I think we're disagreeing over methodology and principle. We're not disagreeing because one person is a Democrat and one person is a Republican.” —Justice Elena Kagan, 2018 conversation with University of Chicago law students.
>> “So the two questions I [always] tend to get when I am at a college audience or a law school audience, and I say, 'I know what you think, you first think that we just sit there and just pick out the cases we want to decide because it would be so interesting.' And I explain how it works. And you think what we really are, are junior-league politicians. That's what you think. You may be too polite to say it, but that's what you think. And if I tell you that we are unanimous 50 percent of the time, you say, 'Oh but those are the technical matters, nobody cares.' I am not going to go into it in-depth, but it isn't what it's like. I think if I had the time, I could persuade you that we are not junior-league politicians, for better or for worse.” —Justice Stephen Breyer, 2014 National Constitution Center.
>> “I am sad that people have lost confidence in the judiciary. What has happened is not that the court has become politicized but that society has. We're not looking for outcomes. We're looking for an approach to our task that will give us a sense of not being arbitrary and capricious. We are trying our best to do our job in a way that we think is fair and impartial.” —Justice Sonia Sotomayor, 2017 University of California Berkeley School of Law.
>> “Our system presumes that there are certain principles that are more important than the temper of the times. And you must have a judge who is detached, who is independent, who is fair, who is committed only to those principles, and not public pressures of other sort. That's the meaning of neutrality.” —Justice Anthony Kennedy, Frontline 2010
>> “It really enrages me to hear people refer to it as a politicized court.” His colleagues vote however they do “because that's who they are. They were selected because of who they are. Maybe the legislature and the president are not as stupid as you think. They assuredly picked those people because of who they are and when they get to the court they remain who they were.” —The late Justice Antonin Scalia, 2012 panel discussion on “Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts.”
>> “What I care most about, I think most of my colleagues do, too, is that we want this institution to maintain the position that it has had in this system, where it is not considered a political branch of government.” —Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 2011 interview.
Read more:
Brett Kavanaugh Walks Back His Angry Senate Testimony
Clarence Thomas Accuser Urges Alaska's Murkowski to Vote Against Kavanaugh
Appellate Lawyers Who Backed Kavanaugh Say He's Still Their Man
Kavanaugh May Face Recusal Dilemmas If He's Confirmed
900+ Law Profs Say Kavanaugh Lacks 'Judicial Temperament,' in Letter to Senate
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBrownstein Adds Former Interior Secretary, Offering 'Strategic Counsel' During New Trump Term
2 minute readWeil, Loading Up on More Regulatory Talent, Adds SEC Asset Management Co-Chief
3 minute readFTC Sues PepsiCo for Alleged Price Break to Big-Box Retailer, Incurs Holyoak's Wrath
5 minute readSupreme Court Will Hear Religious Parents' Bid to Opt Out of LGBTQ-Themed School Books
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.