Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh glances at reporters during a meeting with Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, July 19, 2018. (Manuel Balce Ceneta | The Associated Press)

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh glances at reporters during a meeting with Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, July 19, 2018. (Manuel Balce Ceneta | The Associated Press)

Why Lisa Murkowski should vote no on Brett Kavanaugh

Murkowski has said she will study Kavanaugh’s qualifications. She also said that she will give weight to what Alaskans have to say.

  • By Art Petersen
  • Tuesday, July 24, 2018 12:51pm
  • Opinion

On the “Judicial Common Space” scale of the Supreme Court, President Donald Trump’s nominee Brett Kavanaugh is far right of Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch and just left of Justice Clarence Thomas. Weighing the court so heavily could reverse environmental and consumer protections, eliminate special councils and immunize a sitting president from even investigation. As important as these issues are, one that affects half the nation’s population is most important, women’s rights. It alone is ample reason for Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, to vote no on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh.

In a 2017 speech, Kavanaugh told the American Enterprise Institute that from his time in Yale Law School in 1987, he stood with Justice William Rehnquist, calling him “my first judicial hero.” He said he agreed with Rehnquist in five areas, “criminal procedure, religion, federalism, unenumerated rights and administrative law.” The area of foremost concern is “unenumerated rights” because within these Judge Kavanaugh counts Roe v. Wade, the bedrock of women’s reproductive rights.

The judge said he agreed with Rehnquist’s dissent against this 1972 landmark case. Easily found on the internet, this dissent reveals Rehnquist opining on how Roe probably didn’t even qualify as a plaintiff. But even if she did, he wrote, she had no exclusive privacy right because “a valid state objective” could trump it. And she did not have this right for another reason: the framers of the constitution had no concept of the idea of reproductive decision making. So since the state could outweigh this individual right and since the framers had no concept of it, women have no constitutional right to it.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

Judge Kavanaugh recently demonstrated agreement with the Rehnquist dissent in an October 2017 case involving a 17-year-old immigrant. Seeking asylum, she crossed the U.S. border, found herself pregnant, and wanting to address it, applied for legal bypass. This requires a minor to show a judge that she is mature and sufficiently well informed to make a reproductive decision. She was granted permission under Texas law, but the U.S. government denied her Roe v. Wade right, which as a “person” she is granted by the U.S. Constitution. With legal aid, she appealed to the D.C. Court but was denied relief by a panel of two of three judges, one of whom was Kavanaugh. Appealing to the full court, the appellee prevailed in asserting her constitutional right to make a reproductive choice and have access to fulfilling it.

Kavanaugh composed a bitter dissent patterned on that of Rehnquist’s. He wrote that the court “badly erred” because it granted a new unenumerated right in the constitution. The judge wanted the minor to be transferred to the household of a government-approved sponsor so that she could have adult council about her decision.

The judge believed the stay appropriate because “the Government has permissible interests in favoring fetal life, protecting the best interests of a minor, and refraining from facilitating abortion.” The first two points are Kavanaugh’s personal opinions, not law, and the third was known by him not at all to be the case. Fortunately for the appellee, the full court found that locating a sponsor, going to live with that stranger, and being able to confide in him or her on such a personal matter would cause excessive delay and undue burdens.

Murkowski has said she will study Kavanaugh’s qualifications. She also said that she will give weight to what Alaskans have to say. The judicial subject addressed above is the prominent tip of an iceberg goliath beneath the surface. It deserves a flashing red light, and so do the many others surrounding it. They all pose dangers to the shipping lanes of American life. The judge favors the dissents of Justice Rehnquist, his “judicial hero” since 1987. Judge Kavanaugh poses many judicial dangers to the personal freedoms, rights, security and safety of Americans, but the one with the broadest impact is the threat to women’s rights. The judge has just reinforced his disregard and disrespect, if not animosity, for them. For this reason, but also many others, Murkowski should vote no on the nomination of Kavanaugh.


• Art Petersen is a 43-year resident of Juneau, retired from the University of Alaska Southeast. My Turns and Letters to the Editor represent the view of the author, not the view of the Juneau Empire.


More in Opinion

Web
Have something to say?

Here’s how to add your voice to the conversation.

The U.S. Capitol in Washington on Wednesday, March 12, 2025. (Eric Lee/The New York Times)
My Turn: Important questions for Dan Sullivan and Nick Begich

Dan Sullivan and Nick Begich, what are you going to do to… Continue reading

The Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center on Feb. 22, 2025. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
My Turn: Volunteer for the right cause

Recently I was asked by a friend to volunteer at the Mendenhall… Continue reading

Sen. Dan Sullivan, (R-Alaska) questions Lee Zeldin, President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency, during the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works confirmation hearing, on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Thursday, Jan. 16, 2025. (Kenny Holston/The New York Times)
Opinion: Trickle-down lawlessness

Last weekend, I signed a petition calling on Sen. Dan Sullivan to… Continue reading

The University of Alaska Southeast campus on Monday, Dec. 9, 2019. (Michael Penn | Juneau Empire file photo)
My Turn: University of Alaska’s canceled culture

As an alumnus of UAS I am disgusted at how fast the… Continue reading

Senate President Gary Stevens, a Kodiak Republican, confers with other senators and legislative staff moments before gaveling in the start of this year’s legislative session at the Alaska State Capitol on Tuesday, Jan. 16, 2025. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
My Turn: Support for public schools

There is a perception that all public schools in Alaska are failing… Continue reading

Elon Musk walks with senior staff after arriving with President Donald Trump on Marine One on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, Feb. 19, 2025. (Doug Mills/The New York Times)
My Turn: The end point of delusion

There are times when delusion becomes the organizing principle of entire countries.… Continue reading

Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) points to a map of Alaska and Russia during the confirmation hearing for John Phelan, President Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of the Navy, before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, on Thursday, Feb. 27, 2025. (Kenny Holston/The New York Times)
Opinion: Sen. Sullivan’s bow to power obscures the truth — again

Sen. Lisa Murkowski understands the imperative of speaking truth to power right… Continue reading

Most Read