Dear Susan Collins; Churches, Law Professors, & Conservatives — even his own friends plus Retired Justice John Paul Stevens say Kavanaugh is not fit for Supreme Court

John Paul Stevens said Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s statements revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work.CreditCreditWilliam Thomas Cain/Getty Images

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Across the country, a diverse array of prominent individuals and organizations have come out against Kavanaugh, quite publicly and quite surprisingly. That even includes friends of his. Unlike the political divide on Capitol Hill, which is predictably stark with the exception of a few wavering senators, the national opposition to Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court includes a startling number of church groups, including Mormons and Christians. Conservative scholars and legal figures — such as former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, a lifelong Republican appointed to the court by a Republican president, Gerald Ford — have also spoken out against the nominee.

“I think that his performance during the hearings caused me to change my mind,” Stevens said on Thursday.

Stevens, who retired from the high court in 2010, was referring to Kavanaugh’s bitter and tearful attacks during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. In his prepared remarks, Kavanaugh railed against the Democrats who had vocally opposed his nomination. He even invoked a plot for revenge by supporters of Bill and Hillary Clinton, who resent his previous work for Ken Starr, the special prosecutor who led the campaign to impeach former President Clinton in the 1990s. “He has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities,” Stevens told retirees in Boca Raton, Florida. “For the good of the court, it’s not healthy to get a new justice that can only do a part-time job.”

While Kavanaugh’s nomination had initially moved forward with broad support from religious organizations, that’s changed as a result of the sexual assault allegations, as well as the widespread impression that he lied during his testimony about having received stolen Democratic emails while working in the Bush White House, and that he mis-represented his drinking habits and the meanings of what appeared to be problematic remarks he made in his 1983 senior yearbook. Shortly after Kavanaugh’s testimony last week, a major Catholic magazine issued a surprising call for his nomination to be withdrawn.

“For the good of the country and the future credibility of the Supreme Court in a world that is finally learning to take reports of harassment, assault and abuse seriously,” the editors of America Magazine wrote in an editorial, “it is time to find a nominee whose confirmation will not repudiate that lesson.” On Thursday, Mormon Women for Ethical Government, which has dozens of offices across the country, issued a statement that, while not explicitly calling for Kavanaugh’s nomination to be voted down, called on the Senate to only seat judges “of the highest character and caliber who respect the law both professionally and personally.”

The National Council of Churches, which represents 100,000 congregations and 45 million church-goers, issued a blunt demand for Kavanaugh to step aside after his testimony. “Judge Kavanaugh exhibited extreme partisan bias and disrespect towards certain members of the committee and thereby demonstrated that he possesses neither the temperament nor the character essential for a member of the highest court in our nation,” the NCC statement said. It continued, “We are deeply disturbed by the multiple allegations of sexual assault and call for a full and unhindered investigation of these accusations.”

After initially expressing strong support for him, three of Kavanaugh’s former law clerks unexpectedly moved toward opposition to his nomination after the allegations of sexual assault emerged. In a Monday letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the three clerks wrote that “we have been deeply troubled by those allegations and the events surrounding them and were encouraged by the initiation of a formal FBI investigation.” They submitted their letter before the FBI completed its investigation on Thursday. Though Republican senators applauded the FBI’s efforts, Democratic senators who read the investigation sharply criticized it because a large number of people who wanted to talk to the FBI, including Ford and Ramirez, were not contacted.

Kavanaugh’s nomination initially received widespread support from his former high school classmates at Georgetown Preparatory School, and from former classmates at Yale University, where he was an undergraduate as well as a law student. But in the wake of the assault allegations and his testimony, that support began to crumble, too. More than 125 alumni of Georgetown Prep have signed a petition of support for Ford, calling on other alumni to come forward with information about sexual assaults Kavanaugh was involved in. “Our silence serves no one,” the petition states.

Former students and professors at Yale have also spoken out. Three of Kavanaugh’s close friends from Yale wrote a startling op-ed in the Washington Post on Thursday, with the headline, “We Were Brett Kavanaugh’s Drinking Buddies. We Don’t Think He Should Be Confirmed.” They argued that Kavanaugh flat-out lied in his testimony about not drinking heavily at Yale. “We felt it our civic duty to speak the truth and say that Brett lied under oath while seeking to become a Supreme Court justice,” they wrote. “That is our one and only message, but it is a significant one. For we each believe that telling the truth, no matter how difficult, is a moral obligation for our nation’s leaders. No one should be able to lie their way onto the Supreme Court. Honesty is the glue that holds together a society of laws. Lies are the solvent that dissolves those bonds.”

More broadly, several thousand law professors across the country signeda letter against his nomination, stating about his testimony, “Judge 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.” And just today, the American Bar Association notifiedthe Senate that it was re-opening its evaluation of Kavanaugh’s fitness to serve as a result, again, of his testimony last week.

What follows is a list of people and organizations that have opposed Brett Kavanaugh’s elevation to the Supreme Court of the United States.

Letter signed by 2,400+ law professors

40 Harvard law professors

900 female law school faculty professors

160 Maine lawyers and law professors

Alaskan female attorneys

47 Yale faculty

Yale Law School alumni and students

Retired Justice John Paul Stevens

Three former Kavanaugh clerks

88 Maine writers

The National Council of Churches

Mormon Women for Ethical Government

America Magazine

Kavanaugh’s Former Yale Classmate

Havard law professor Laurence Tribe

Alumni of Georgetown Preparatory School

Benjamin Wittes — “I Know Brett Kavanaugh, but I Wouldn’t Confirm Him

1,600 men in NYT

Evangelical Minister Jonathan Wilson-Hartgrove

Top photo: Protesters against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh demonstrate outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 4, 2018.


U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee to vote Friday on Kavanaugh after turbulent hearing; Reports White House Counsel limits scope and range of FBI Kavanaugh sex assault probe


Senate Judiciary Committee schedules vote on Kavanaugh nomination the day after hearing on sexual assault allegation

  • The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh for Friday, according to a notice from the committee’s Republican chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.
  • That puts the contentious vote on President Donald Trump’s nominee just one day after a much-anticipated hearing in which a woman who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault is expected to testify to lawmakers.
  • Though Grassley said in a post on Twitter Tuesday evening that the Judiciary Committee vote would only take place “if we’re ready to vote. If we aren’t ready, we won’t.”
AIWA! NO! |Republican senators have now said the Senate judiciary committee plans to vote Friday morning on Kavanaugh’s nomination, the AP reports.

John Cornyn of Texas, the second ranking-Republican, had said Thursday that the GOP conference would meet and “see where we are”. After meeting, Republican senator Lindsey Graham said, “There will be a vote tomorrow morning.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a vote on the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh for Friday, according to a notice from the committee’s Republican chairman, Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa.

Though Grassley said in a post on Twitter Tuesday evening that the Judiciary Committee vote would only take place “if we’re ready to vote. If we aren’t ready, we won’t.”

A Friday vote would force lawmakers to decide on President Donald Trump’s nominee just one day after a much-anticipated hearing in which a woman who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault is expected to testify to lawmakers. That woman, Christine Blasey Ford, has been locked in negotiations with the committee’s Republican staffers over the details of the hearing since shortly after coming forward with her accusation just over one week ago.



Judic Cmte noticed POTENTIAL exec mtg for Friday. Still taking this 1 step at a time. After hrg Dr Ford & Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony- if we‘re ready to vote, we will vote. If we aren’t ready, we won’t. Cmte rules normally require 3 days notice so we‘re following regular order

No hearing has been scheduled for a second woman, Deborah Ramirez, who also claims that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her, and it is unclear if there will be one. John Clune, a lawyer for Ramirez, wrote in a post on Twitter Tuesday that Ramirez “remains adamant” that an FBI investigation is the appropriate venue to discuss her accusation.

The top ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee said scheduling a vote for Friday made it clear that “Republicans don’t want this to be a fair process.”

“For Republicans to schedule a Friday vote on Brett Kavanaugh today, two days before Dr. Blasey Ford has had a chance to tell her story, is outrageous,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., said in the statement issued Tuesday evening.

Following a vote in the committee, the nomination will be considered by the full Senate. Republicans hold a narrow majority in the chamber, though not all members of the Senate GOP have indicated how they plan to vote.

Kavanaugh’s nomination has been roiled by the dual allegations of sexual assault, which surfaced in recent weeks. Less than a month ago, the federal appeals court judge appeared set to be confirmed by the Senate in time to take a seat on the high court before the start of oral arguments next month.

That would have given a key victory to Trump, who has made appointing conservatives to the court a pillar in his political message to voters. And it would solidify a conservative majority on the nation’s highest court, possibly for a generation.

But the questions over Kavanaugh’s treatment of women — as well as his credibility — have thrust the confirmation process into deep uncertainty.

Amid the uproar, Kavanaugh has vowed not to withdraw, and Trump has committed to pursuing the matter to a vote. In a television appearance Monday night, Kavanaugh repeated his categorical denials of the two accusations, and, sitting beside his wife Ashley, told Fox News that he was “not going to let false accusations drive us out of this process.”

The Republican leadership has remained defiant.

“We’re going to be moving forward,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., told reporters Tuesday. “I’m confident we’re going to win, confident that he’ll be confirmed in the very near future.”

U.S. legal experts, pundits and former peers of Brett Kavanaugh believe the embattled Supreme Court nominee lied under oath


Legal Experts and Yale Friends Believe Kavanaugh Committed Perjury

by  //Multiple legal experts, pundits and former peers of Brett Kavanaugh believe the embattled Supreme Court nominee lied under oath during his re-hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday while denying various accusations and questions raised during the hours-long grilling session.

Aside from the multiple sexual assault and rape accusations leveled against Kavanaugh, critics–including at least one prominent conservative–have focused on the judge’s answers and alleged evasions regarding his drinking and certain terms inscribed in his senior yearbook from elite feeder school Georgetown Prep.

1. Kavanaugh’s Classmates Say He Lied About Drinking

Questions about Kavanaugh’s alleged habitual blackout drunkenness were repeatedly raised by Democratic Party senators. Most infamously, during Kavanaugh’s questioning by Sheldon Whitehouse(D-RI) and Amy Klobuchar (DFL-MN). While dodging many of the senators’ questions, Kavanaugh retorted back with questions about both Klobuchar’s and Whitehouse’s own drinking habits.

At least once, however, Kavanaugh categorically denied that his drinking ever reached such a level. He said:

I drank beer with my friends. Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer. I still like beer. But I did not drink beer to the point of blacking out.

But that’s just not true, according to some of Kavanaugh’s good friends from his days at Yale.

Elizabeth Swisher, a physician who lives in Seattle, told the New York Times, “I drank a lot. Brett drank more.” In additional comments on The Last Word With Lawrence O’DonnellSwisher said:

I was appalled. He was clearly lying. And it was incredibly disturbing to see somebody perjuring them self who’s in line to be a Supreme Court justice…That’s what was surprising to me. Is that, I drank too much in college. I think a lot of kids drink too much in college. ‘But if you’re able to get your work done and you move on with your life and you don’t drink as much–but we all drank a fair amount and we made some stupid choices.’ That would have been totally fine. If he had said that, I wouldn’t be here today.

Lynne Brooks, who also says she drank a lot with Kavanaugh during the Yale days concurred with Swisher’s estimation. She said,  “I agree. The reason that I decided to speak out was when he gave the Fox News interview and, as I said in the Washington Post, tried to paint himself as a choir boy where all he did was study and play sports and every once in awhile he would have a beer–and that’s simply not consistent with the Brett Kavanaugh I knew in college.”

And, as previously noted by the Department of Defense’s former special counsel and present New York University Law Professor Ryan Goodman, nearly one dozen former classmates of Kavanaugh have described the Supreme Court nominee as a heavy drinker who was frequently “very drunk.” Deborah Ramirez

Brooks and Swisher were then questioned by the MSNBC host about Deborah Ramirez‘s account of Kavanaugh’s alleged exposure and sexual assault against her. While both women noted they were friends of Ramirez, they each said they were not witnesses and could not corroborate her accusations.

O’Donnell, then returned to Kavanaugh’s apparent minimization of his drinking from back in the day. Swisher said, “That was blurring the difference between truth and falsehood. And for somebody who’s a federal judge and in line potentially to be in the highest court in this country, there can be no alternative facts. We need somebody who stands by truth and justice.”

2. Allegedly Misleading Testimony About His Yearbook

Another portion of Kavanaugh’s testimony which has drawn both inquiry and ridicule, was the judge’s apparently fanciful definitions of yearbook phrases. Also elicited during the Whitehouse testimony, Kavanaugh was pressed on the meaning of the terms “boofed” and “Devil’s Triangle.”

The inscription in Kavanaugh’s yearbook reads, “Judge — Have You Boofed Yet?” A similar inscription appears in Mark Judge‘s yearbook and reads, “Bart, have you boofed yet?” The yearbook simply lists “Devil’s Triangle” as one of Kavanaugh’s achievements next to his senior photo.

During his testimony, Kavanaugh claimed that “boofed” was a teenage word for “flatulence” and that Devil’s Triangle referred to “a drinking game…a quarters game.” (A quarters game is typically a game that involves trying to launch and land a quarter into a container of alcohol.)

Both of those definitions apparently don’t square.

In the 1980s and now, “boofing” was widely known as a term for anal sex, according to both the New York Times and Urban Dictionary. Nowadays, the term is also associated with the anal delivery of alcohol or drugs in order to achieve inebriation at a much faster clip, according to Urban Dictionary.

Bill Barbot, whose attendance at Georgetown Prep overlapped with Kavanaugh’s, discussed those disputed yearbook phrases with the Times He said, “Our senior yearbook pages were a place to have a little bit of fun with commemorating inside jokes. However, the spin that Brett was putting on it was a complete overstatement of the innocence with which they were intended.”

William Fishburne managed the Georgetown Prep football during Kavanaugh’s senior year there. He also spoke with the the Times about Kavanaugh’s yearbook excuses. Fishburne said, “The explanation of Devil’s Triangle does not hold water for me.”

Other, at least for now unnamed classmates of Kavanaugh’s are disputing Kavanaugh’s supplied definitions as well. Journalist David Enrich noted, just after the hearing:

David Enrich


Based on extensive interviews by me and @katekelly with Kavanaugh’s former Georgetown Prep classmates, what he just said about the meanings of “boofed” and “Devil’s Triangle” is not true.

According to Urban Dictionary and, well, pretty much anyone who’s previously heard the term, including the present author, “Devil’s Triangle” refers to a sexual encounter involving two men and one woman. And even some high-profile conservatives don’t appear to be buying Kavanaugh’s definition. The National Review’s Jamie Weinstein noted:

Jamie Weinstein


If Kavanaugh lied about what “Devil’s Triangle” meant — even if it was a dumb line of questioning and even if he did it to spare his family further embarrassment by discussing what was probably a juvenile inside high school joke — could that tank his nomination?

3. Legal Experts Tend to Agree This Looks Like Perjury

Goodman also supplied various additional accounts of Kavanaugh’s alleged binge drinking in a Twitter thread earlier on Saturday to support the idea that the nominee lied about his college drinking habits. Picking up on that thread, CNN’s legal analyst and former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa chided Kavanaugh for his apparent dishonesty about the small details explored above.

She wrote, “Had [Kavanaugh] simply told the Judiciary Committee that he partied in high school/college, sometimes to excess – but still denied the assault – these commentaries would be net neutral. Now they contradict his sworn testimony, thereby undermining his other denials and bolstering Dr. Ford.”

PRESIDENT TRUMP’S US Supreme Court Nominee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh in Jeopardy AS Day of Recogning Fast Approaching


Peter Foley | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Michael Avenatti, lawyer of adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, arrives at federal court in New York, U.S., on Wednesday, May 30, 2018

AIWA! NO! This AIN’T about #metoo..!! This AIN’T about sexual assault..!! THIS is about a conflicted and deficient Republican lawman being thrust onto the highest court in the land, and FOR LIFE, and who would joyfully DO Trump’s and Grand Old Party (GOP)’S bidding all the way to the bank. Republicans face political annihilation during November 6 Midterms hence throat-forcing Kavanaugh onto the bench  ……the Supreme Court of the United States of America..!! Period…!! This is partisan politics at its worst…!! All roads lead to that….all spotlights point to that….PARTISAN POLITICS..!! You may want to ask; is Kavanaugh capable of ‘attempted rape’ or ‘rape?’ Umm…!! There is a whiff; stench emanating from that corner … 

CRIMSON TAZVINZWA//Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who is facing heavy scrutiny after Dr. Christine Blasey Ford accused him of sexually assaulting her in high school, has been accused by another woman, Deborah Ramirez, of sexual misconduct.

In a New Yorker report from Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer, Ramirez recounts an incident that she says occurred during the 1983-84 academic year, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale University. Ramirez alleges that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a college party, where they had both been drinking, “thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away.”

Four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation through a civil rights attorney, and at least two have begun investigating it, according to the report. Senior Republican staffers are also aware of the allegation.

Though Ramirez was initially hesitant to characterize her memories, which contained gaps due to the alcohol, after six days of “carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney,” Ramirez felt confident in her recollections. She believes an FBI investigation into the alleged incident is warranted.

In a statement to the New Yorker, Kavanaugh wrote, “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name — and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building — against these last-minute allegations.”

“I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” Ramirez said of the incident. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” She told the New Yorker that she remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.”

The Senate Judiciary Committee contacts Michael Avenatti after the lawyer claims to have evidence of misconduct by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Avenatti says he represents a client who has information about the judge, though he has not yet shared that information publicly.

READ RELATED: Senate panel contacts Michael Avenatti after his claim of damaging information about Brett Kavanaugh

READ RELATED: Second woman accuses Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct; he denies it