ADVERTISEMENT

Kavanaugh’s Exercise of Discretion"

UCFBS

Todd's Tiki Bar
Gold Member
Oct 21, 2001
28,510
10,637
113
USA
As Libertarian, this is why I read the Liberal (not Clinton-Media-Progressive engine) 'The Atlantic,' a magazine that has existed since the middle of the 19th century.

'Kavanaugh’s Exercise of Discretion'

'It’s a reasonably fair generalization to say that liberal judges see more discretion in the law and use it more to ameliorate perceived injustices, while conservatives prefer to avoid the prospect of discretion wherever they can, thinking that it gives unelected judges too much power over citizens.
. . .
Kavanaugh happened to be on the panel that heard the case. The essence of what he said to the government’s lawyer from the bench sticks with me, even if the specific wording does not: Give me a hard-and-fast rule and I’ll apply it, but here I have discretion. Why shouldn’t we let him have the appeal and turn to the merits?
. . .
The Kavanaugh I know is likely to be reluctant to find discretion in the law. He will see hard-and-fast rules that bind him. But where he does see discretion? At least in this one instance, he was generous and open to the appeal of the little guy. And that, in the end, isn’t a bad way to be.'
 
Last edited:
The penultimate sword that cuts both ways. Conservatives want to preserve the rule of law but want discretion when it comes to precedence that doesn't align with their personal tendencies. Liberals want discretion until it comes to precendent that they like.

This is why case law is so problematic for SCOTUS and exactly why textualism should br a standard litmus test for any nominee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFBS
The penultimate sword that cuts both ways. Conservatives want to preserve the rule of law but want discretion when it comes to precedence that doesn't align with their personal tendencies. Liberals want discretion until it comes to precendent that they like.

This is why case law is so problematic for SCOTUS and exactly why textualism should br a standard litmus test for any nominee.
In everything I've read so far, Kavanaugh sides with the individual when he issues discretion. This includes even in the case where his personal beliefs are in conflict, and he will always rule in favor of precedent or individual, even if it goes against his personal beliefs.

Roe v. Wade has been a repeat example, one where he will laud the dissenters, while still respecting the precedent, and in the case of individuals, see the right on a case-by-base basis that doesn't fit in the precedent. The Clinton-Media-Progressive engine is getting rather old on missing this reality.

As I always say, the best leaders/justices are conservative-in-real-life, 'do as I do, not as I say,' Libertarians who will rule everyone can do anything they want, as long as it won't lead to the breakdown of society.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT