Opinion piece on what makes a judge qualified for Supreme Court

Imagine that U.S. Supreme Court judicial nominations and confirmations were nonpolitical. The president would nominate the best-qualified candidate, regardless of politics, and the Senate would treat its advice-and-consent role seriously. Were that the case, is Judge Brett Kavanaugh qualified to be a Supreme Court justice?

[...]

To be qualified starts with technical skills — knowledge of the law, legal reasoning, past experiences, including as a judge. By those accounts, Judge Kavanaugh is qualified — even highly qualified as a judge, according to the American Bar Association.

[...]

Political science research shows that the ideology of judges often matters in decision-making. As retired Judge Richard Posner once said about Judge Robert Bork when the latter was nominated to the Supreme Court, judges are not potted plants. Judges must make difficult calls that demand good judgment, and judging is not purely mechanical and value free. If it were, we could replace judges with computers or robots.

[...]

The Bork hearing was political, but “political” included a question regarding whether his views were within the accepted mainstream of legal orthodoxy. Justices on the Supreme Court are trustees for the Constitution because they interpret it, and part of “advise and consent” by the Senate should be to determine whether a nominee can be trusted to serve in that trustee role. There is no way one can ask nominees about all issues they may confront as a justice; at some point, it is about whether one can trust their judgment. For that reason, character matters, too, as part of ascertaining qualifications or fitness to serve.

  The Hill

The author of this piece just ran right past a point he was seemingly making. "There is no way one can ask nominees about all issues they may confront as a justice." Every time the committee got close to getting an answer from Kavanaugh about his views on some important political consideration, he said he couldn't comment because that might come up in a case soon. So, apparently, you can't ask Kavanaugh about ANY issue he may confront as a justice, let alone ALL.

Now think also about the concept of mercy and forgiveness. As eloquently stated in Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice”: “The quality of mercy is not strained.” By that, should all of us not be entitled to forgiveness and a second chance?

In the case of Judge Kavanaugh, let us assume the allegation of sexual assault against him is true, and assume he had been convicted of a crime and paid his legal debt to society. Should we not forgive him and look at the rest of his life to determine whether he is qualified — or does one bad act disqualify him for life?

[...]

Judge Kavanaugh is accused of a bad act. Even the allegation is true, does his reported behavior on one night in high school render him unqualified to sit as a Supreme Court justice?

No, but never admitting it, repenting it, and lying about it sure does. Which is why this needs an FBI investigation and not just the testimony of Kavanaugh and Ford.

The author of this piece (David Schultz, a professor of political science at Hamline University) also never even mentions that we already know Kavanaugh has a propensity to lie, as he lied to the committee about having been involved with different topics when he worked for Bush, and he lied about whether he received stolen records (which he also lied about during his confirmation to the Appellate Court).

Surely repeatedly lying to Senate committees counts as a reason to disqualify a person for the Supreme Court.

Five Times Brett Kavanaugh Appears to Have Lied to Congress While Under Oath

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.