It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: gortex
as the trainwreck of " opposition " to justice kavanaugh has mutated to " he is not fit / lacks demeanour " to serve
commenters SHOULD know who ginsberg is - hell they should know the other 7 SCOTUS justices too
but it takes` a special kind of wingnut mental gymnastics to " conclude " that kavanaugh is unfit , yet ginsberg is fit to serve
Ginsberg was an open activist at the time of her appointment. It was her successful pursuit of justice for gender equality that won her the nomination. What is Kavanaugh's sctivist platform? Roe V Wade?... because Sen Collins is confident he won't touch Roe V Wade.
So, what is Kavanaugh's cause that puts in the same category as Justice Ginsberg?
If you can't be bothered to know who the other SCOTUS justices are and their own judicial temperment, then why are making opinions about whether or not Kavanaugh has the appropriate temper?
Why is political activism something that uniquely qualifies you to be a SCOTUS justice?
originally posted by: FyreByrd
Think what you will about - assault allegations, perjury allegations and other questionable behavior both public and private.
This is an open letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee from 500+ Law Professors representing 90 different Law Schools.
Judicial temperament is one of the most important qualities of a judge.
As the Congressional Research Service explains, to be a judge requires that an individual have “a personality that is evenhanded, unbiased, impartial, courteous yet firm, and dedicated to a process, not a result.”
 The concern for judicial temperament dates back to our founding; in Federalist Paper 78, entitled “Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” Alexander Hamilton expressed the need for “the integrity and moderation of the judiciary.”
We are law professors who teach, research, and write about the judicial institutions of this country. Many of us appear in state and federal court, and our work means that we will continue to do so, including before the United States Supreme Court.
We regret that we feel compelled to write to you to provide our views that at the Senate hearings on Thursday, September 27, 2018, the Honorable Brett Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land.
The question at issue was of course painful for anyone. But Judge Kavanaugh exhibited a lack of commitment to judicious inquiry. Instead of being open to the necessary search for accuracy, Judge Kavanaugh was repeatedly aggressive with questioners.
Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh located the hearing as a partisan question, referring to it as “a calculated and orchestrated political hit,” rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory, and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to questioners.
In short, this man (and I use the term broadly), is unfit to serve in any capacity as a Judge.
Would you want him 'judging' your son, your daughter?
In other words ginsburg is allowed to be partisan because you like her positions.
Apparently the liberal professors think when the media is calling you a serial rapist you should just sit there and smile ?