Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Religion News
Brett Kavanaugh: A Political Ideologue Not a Judge

Brett Kavanaugh: A Political Ideologue Not a Judge

Last updated on: September 5, 2018 at 9:31 am by Guest Contributor

Brett Kavanaugh: A Political Ideologue Not a Judge 2018-09-05T09:31:23-04:00 Guest Contributor

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Embed from Getty Images

by Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite

Brett Kavanaugh just claimed, in the Judiciary Committee hearings on his nomination to be a Supreme Court judge, that “a good judge must be an umpire.” No. Not even close. That’s the typical conservative dodge to avoid talking about their approach to interpreting the law. Judges need wisdom, not just 20/20 vision and a good view of the plate. In scripture, for example, Deborah was not called “a wise umpire in Israel.”

Instead, Kavanaugh seems to be exactly what Sen. Hirano called him in her opening remarks at the Judiciary Committee hearing: “a pre-selected political ideologue.” This is the logical conclusion one must draw from the failure to release a vast amount of Kavanaugh’s material. This lack of transparency has led to the viral hashtag #WhatAreTheyHiding.

Kavanaugh, if you so value impartiality, release all the documents.

Instead, there appears to be an enormous cover-up. #WhatAreTheyHiding? Is it torture apology? Opposition to reproductive rights? Hostility to equal rights for LGBTQ Americans?

Roberts Redux

I have a good deal of experience with hearings on nominees to the Supreme Court. In 2005, I was invited to be an expert witness (https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GPO-CHRG-ROBERTS.pdf) in the Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearings on John Roberts’ appointment to be Chief Justice. Roberts similarly refused to release many of his papers.

Readers might recall that in those hearings, John Roberts also had promised to bring “no agenda” and to take a minimalist approach to Constitutional interpretation. He compared his way of interpreting the law to that of an “umpire calling balls and strikes.”

It has not worked out that way. The Roberts court has struck down several longstanding prohibitions on corporate political contributions, for example, in the process overturning established precedent.

So much for impartiality.

In my testimony, I contrasted John Roberts’ view of the Constitution with that of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I testified, “Few Americans have understood the promise inherent in the Constitution better than Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Dr. King, in his ‘I have a Dream’ speech was able, as few before or since, to reach into our constitutional past and proclaim the deep sense of the words that the Constitution was a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. King argued that so far this promissory note to African-Americans had been returned: insufficient funds. The promise for King was a dream, but not a fantasy.”

What King understood about the Constitution, and in my view Chief Justice Roberts and conservatives who claim to be “umpires” do not, is that the Constitution is broad and inclusive, a living document that reaches beyond our current divisions to bring about one “United” States of America that is fair and inclusive.

To me, Roberts’s predilection for conservative judicial activism was obvious from the time of the hearings on his appointment. It should have been obvious to anybody, especially the senators on the Judiciary Committee, who were also supposed to look at Robert’s record prior to confirming him.

The same is true of Kavanaugh, thoughthis committee and witnesses have even less to work with. That, in itself, should be enough to deny him an appointment to the Supreme Court.

What is Kavanaugh so afraid the American people will learn about his record? The truth?

I was right in 2005 about what the Supreme Court would be like under the leadership of John Roberts, and I’ve been proven right, over and over. For all the good that does us.

I’m right about Kavanaugh. I know it and I hope you do as well.

Dr. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite—Professor of Theology and President (1998-2008), Chicago Theological Seminary

Previous Post

July 5, 2018

Feel Awful? How to Identify Trump's Politics of Abuse and Subvert It

Next Post

September 18, 2018 The Moral Imperative of #BelievetheWomen

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Story of God Uncategorized

Select a Month September 2022 August 2022 January 2022 December 2021 August 2021 July 2021 February 2021 January 2021 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 November 2017 October 2017 August 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 October 2014 September 2014 July 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Cast all your anxiety on him because he ____ for you.

Select your answer to see how you score.

Provides Cares Loves Watches