do you think Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett were completely honest ....

[APersonWithNoName]

when they were questioned about Roe and Wade at their senate confirmation hearing?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

when they were questioned about Roe and Wade at their senate confirmation hearing?

If there is a multiverse, there is no universe in which I believe they were being honest…

 

[APersonWithNoName]

If there is a multiverse, there is no universe in which I believe they were being honest…

I recently just re watched Neil Gorsuch's answer on Youtube, in his defense, he didn't actually say what he would do when faced with a decision on Roe and Wade, he just said it is a precedent and that need to be taken into consideration and that Trump never asked him to strike down Roe and Wade.

 

[Fantine]

In a less polarized environment, judges would be evaluated by their experience and their integrity.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg was confirmed by 95 out of 100 Senators because they believed in her integrity.

Antonin Scalia was confirmed by a vote of 98-2.

Obviously many progressives voted for Scalia because of his experience and integrity, and many conservatives voted for Ginsburg for the same reason.

In today's atmosphere, no judge would ever be confirmed if he/she needed 60 votes.

With Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney-Barrett, only Gorsuch might have gotten a huge majority vote 25 years ago, Coney-Barrett was too light on experience, with just one year as a federal judge to get her in under the wire. Kavanaugh's morals were questionable, and his arrogant entitled response to questioning showed he lacked the proper temperament to be a judge.

When Obama nominated Elena Kagan, she had a distinguished career in law and as a law professor but had never been a judge. He felt that the Senate was so polarized that the only safe choice was someone who didn't have a paper trail of legal decisions to be ripped apart,

I would like our nation to go back to civility, but as long as one party is in thrall to the former president there will never be civility.

 

[disciple Clint]

when they were questioned about Roe and Wade at their senate confirmation hearing?

I think we should review the transcripts before we go jumping to conclusions. Let us not forget that attorneys have a way of answering questions without answering the question. Questions like "can you define the word woman" get non answers.

 

[chevyontheriver]

I would like our nation to go back to civility, but as long as one party is in thrall to the former president there will never be civility.

Which party invented Borking? Which then senator invented Borking? Civility is long gone. Not the fault of any one party.

 

[JustOneWay]

do you think Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett were completely honest ....

This is difficult to say, they're lawyers and can weasel around any question. But I do believe Kavanaugh was completely honest when he said he likes beer.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I doubt they lied in their senate hearings. At this point every nominee of every president knows what to say (and what not to). "Sure, Roe is precedent and deserves respect and is 'settled' law" (but of course precedents can be overturned).

I guess I'm (slightly) more interested in whatever personal assurances a couple of those judges gave to Susan Collins. She has more or less said they lied to her on this very point.

 

[DaisyDay]

I think we should review the transcripts before we go jumping to conclusions. Let us not forget that attorneys have a way of answering questions without answering the question. Questions like "can you define the word woman" get non answers.

Non-questions get non-answers.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

I recently just re watched Neil Gorsuch's answer on Youtube, in his defense, he didn't actually say what he would do when faced with a decision on Roe and Wade, he just said it is a precedent and that need to be taken into consideration and that Trump never asked him to strike down Roe and Wade.

No truly impartial judge could ever definitively say how he would rule on a hypothetical case that hasn’t even arisen yet.

 

[hedrick]

I don’t think the hearing is the question. Susan Collins includes personal meetings. My guess is that their answers were vague, as prospective judges always are. Probably not lies, but enough that Collins came away with the wrong impression. I’m assuming that Collins is telling the truth.

In my opinion saying something that you know your hearer will misinterpret is a lie, but in gray areas it’s hard to establish what someone knew or intended.

One example would be agreeing that Rowe v Wade is established law, without saying that you’re open to changing established law.

 

[hislegacy]

when they were questioned about Roe and Wade at their senate confirmation hearing?

Yes