Do Lifetime Supreme Court Appointments Still Make Sense?

October 8, 2018

By Amanda Weston

Justice Brett Kavanugh's Saturday confirmation may have awakened some Americans to a different version of the Supreme Court.

"I think if there's any silver lining to this, [it's that]\ we should stop thinking that it was ever non-political," John Iadarola, co-host of The Young Turks, told Cheddar Monday.

"This idea that there are activist judges and there are other judges that, despite the fact that they work in politics, that they pay attention to politics every day, they did their entire lives, they're not actually swayed by any political ideology or anything like that. That's absurd. These are political figures."

Nick Givas, reporter at The Daily Caller, agreed. He told Cheddar that many have tried to convince others the Supreme Court is "this unbiased holy entity that is above reproach."

But that's not really the case, he said.

"I mean, it's appointed by presidents," Givas said. "We count them by conservatives versus liberals. Every time we break down the numbers and the balance of 'the Court' it's a political balance, and they decide cases that are going to affect the law ー the law of the land, people's everyday lives. It's hard not to be political. We're asking them to be more than just men and women. We're asking them to be completely incorruptible, and they're human."

Politics and controversy were major players in Kavanaugh's confirmation. The Senate approved him for the job Saturday by a slim 50-48 vote ー the slimmest confirmation margin since 1881 ー as some onlookers in the gallery repeatedly shouted, "shame!"

The vote came a little over a week after dramatic testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee from both Prof. Christine Blasey Ford, who accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when the two were in high school, and the judge who vehemently denied the allegations.

Democrats slammed the ensuing FBI investigation as incomplete, whereas many Republicans praised it. Even President Donald Trump weighed in.

"This is now the 7th time the FBI has investigated Judge Kavanaugh. If we made it 100, it would still not be good enough for the Obstructionist Democrats," he tweeted.

Iadarola alluded to the "popular mythology" that Justices are driven only by Constitutional concerns, not party.

"That might be true to some extent, but they are political people," he said. "And Brett Kavanaugh just makes that even more obvious, especially with his rant during his testimony about some sort of bizarre Clinton revenge plot."

Givas said another possible effect of Kavanaugh's confirmation has yet to be seen.

"Obviously the Democrats are getting a boost because they lost this fight, so they're going to come out and definitely vote," Givas said. "But I think Republicans, I think they're upset about this process, whether he was going to be confirmed or not. This has awoken a party that was asleep."

Givas said those who weren't planning to vote may now cast ballots for the GOP, potentially contributing to an unforeseen "red wave."

"I think they're going to defy conventional wisdom and the current polling," Givas said. "I think they are going to hold the House, and they're going to hold the Senate."

Kavanaugh officially begins his duties as Justice on Tuesday.

For full interview click here.