https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/02/im-a-liberal-feminist-heres-why-i-support-judge-kavanaugh-219081





I’m a Liberal Feminist Lawyer. Here’s Why Democrats Should Support Judge
Kavanaugh.

By LISA BLATT

August 02, 2018

The Friday Cover

Sometimes a superstar is just a superstar. That is the case with Judge
Brett Kavanaugh, who had long been considered the most qualified nominee
for the Supreme Court if Republicans secured the White House. The Senate
should confirm him.

I have argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court, more than any other
woman. I worked in the Solicitor General’s Office for 13 years during
the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. Because I am a liberal
Democrat and feminist, I expect my friends on the left will criticize me
for speaking up for Kavanaugh. But we all benefit from having smart,
qualified and engaged judges on our highest court, regardless of the
administration that nominates them.

What happened to Merrick Garland was a disgrace. His nomination was the
Democratic equivalent of Kavanaugh’s. Garland, too, is brilliant,
admired, experienced, sober and humane. Indeed, Kavanaugh himself called
Garland “supremely qualified” for the Supreme Court. That he made that
statement while Garland’s nomination was pending—and was the subject of
intense partisan warfare—says a great deal about Kavanaugh’s character.

But unless the Democrats want to stand on the principle of an eye for an
eye—and I don’t think they should—folks should stop pretending that
Kavanaugh or his record is the issue. He is supremely qualified.
Although this fact is distressing, Republicans control both the White
House and Senate. In comparable circumstances, when President Barack
Obama was in office, our party appointed two justices to the Supreme Court.

I first met Kavanaugh in 2009, shortly after I left the Solicitor
General’s Office. He spontaneously emailed to say he liked an article I
had written for The Green Bag, an irreverent legal magazine, about my
experience arguing in front of the Supreme Court. I had just started my
own appellate practice, and his note was extremely thoughtful.

Months later, I asked Kavanaugh to join a panel at Georgetown Law School
to review a film about college debate. He responded that he knew nothing
about debate but nevertheless was happy to help. When a law student
asked him how debate had shaped his career, he answered: “I actually
never debated, but I did play football, and the two are basically the
same.” He then offered this advice: “Practice, learn to get along with
all of your teammates, learn from your mistakes, and have fun.” It was
clear that judge cared about mentoring and teaching law students and was
invested in helping others to succeed.



Since then, I’ve kept in regular contact with the judge, mostly to talk
about kids and work-life balance, including the challenges I’ve had as a
woman trying to raise two children while practicing law. Kavanaugh is a
great listener, and one of the warmest, friendliest and kindest
individuals I know. And other than my former boss, Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, I know of no other judge who stands out for hiring female law
clerks. My profession is overrun with men, and unless institutions like
the Supreme Court do more to hire women, the upper echelons of my
profession will never fully include women.

I do not have a single litmus test for a nominee. My standard is whether
the nominee is unquestionably well-qualified, brilliant, has integrity
and is within the mainstream of legal thought. Kavanaugh easily meets
those criteria. I have no insight into his views on Roe v.
Wade—something extremely important to me as a liberal, female Democrat
and mother of a teenage girl. But wh**ever he decides on Roe, I know it
will be because he believes the Constitution requires that result.

It’s easy to forget that the 41 Republican senators who v**ed to confirm
Ginsburg knew she was a solid v**e in favor of Roe, but nonetheless
v**ed for her because of her overwhelming qualifications. Just as a
Democratic nominee with similar credentials and mainstream legal views
deserves to be confirmed, so too does Kavanaugh—not because he will come
out the way I want in each case or even most cases, but because he will
do the job with dignity, intelligence, empathy and integrity.

Democrats should quit attacking Kavanaugh—full stop. It is unbecoming to
block him simply because they want to, and they risk alienating
intelligent people who see the obvious: He is the most qualified
conservative for the job.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Lisa Blatt heads the Supreme Court practice at Arnold & Porter. She has
argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court. These are her personal views.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/02/im-a-liberal-feminist-heres-why-i-support-judge-kavanaugh-219081





I’m a Liberal Feminist Lawyer. Here’s Why Democrats Should Support Judge
Kavanaugh.

By LISA BLATT

August 02, 2018

The Friday Cover

Sometimes a superstar is just a superstar. That is the case with Judge
Brett Kavanaugh, who had long been considered the most qualified nominee
for the Supreme Court if Republicans secured the White House. The Senate
should confirm him.

I have argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court, more than any other
woman. I worked in the Solicitor General’s Office for 13 years during
the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. Because I am a liberal
Democrat and feminist, I expect my friends on the left will criticize me
for speaking up for Kavanaugh. But we all benefit from having smart,
qualified and engaged judges on our highest court, regardless of the
administration that nominates them.

What happened to Merrick Garland was a disgrace. His nomination was the
Democratic equivalent of Kavanaugh’s. Garland, too, is brilliant,
admired, experienced, sober and humane. Indeed, Kavanaugh himself called
Garland “supremely qualified” for the Supreme Court. That he made that
statement while Garland’s nomination was pending—and was the subject of
intense partisan warfare—says a great deal about Kavanaugh’s character.

But unless the Democrats want to stand on the principle of an eye for an
eye—and I don’t think they should—folks should stop pretending that
Kavanaugh or his record is the issue. He is supremely qualified.
Although this fact is distressing, Republicans control both the White
House and Senate. In comparable circumstances, when President Barack
Obama was in office, our party appointed two justices to the Supreme Court.

I first met Kavanaugh in 2009, shortly after I left the Solicitor
General’s Office. He spontaneously emailed to say he liked an article I
had written for The Green Bag, an irreverent legal magazine, about my
experience arguing in front of the Supreme Court. I had just started my
own appellate practice, and his note was extremely thoughtful.

Months later, I asked Kavanaugh to join a panel at Georgetown Law School
to review a film about college debate. He responded that he knew nothing
about debate but nevertheless was happy to help. When a law student
asked him how debate had shaped his career, he answered: “I actually
never debated, but I did play football, and the two are basically the
same.” He then offered this advice: “Practice, learn to get along with
all of your teammates, learn from your mistakes, and have fun.” It was
clear that judge cared about mentoring and teaching law students and was
invested in helping others to succeed.



Since then, I’ve kept in regular contact with the judge, mostly to talk
about kids and work-life balance, including the challenges I’ve had as a
woman trying to raise two children while practicing law. Kavanaugh is a
great listener, and one of the warmest, friendliest and kindest
individuals I know. And other than my former boss, Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, I know of no other judge who stands out for hiring female law
clerks. My profession is overrun with men, and unless institutions like
the Supreme Court do more to hire women, the upper echelons of my
profession will never fully include women.

I do not have a single litmus test for a nominee. My standard is whether
the nominee is unquestionably well-qualified, brilliant, has integrity
and is within the mainstream of legal thought. Kavanaugh easily meets
those criteria. I have no insight into his views on Roe v.
Wade—something extremely important to me as a liberal, female Democrat
and mother of a teenage girl. But wh**ever he decides on Roe, I know it
will be because he believes the Constitution requires that result.

It’s easy to forget that the 41 Republican senators who v**ed to confirm
Ginsburg knew she was a solid v**e in favor of Roe, but nonetheless
v**ed for her because of her overwhelming qualifications. Just as a
Democratic nominee with similar credentials and mainstream legal views
deserves to be confirmed, so too does Kavanaugh—not because he will come
out the way I want in each case or even most cases, but because he will
do the job with dignity, intelligence, empathy and integrity.

Democrats should quit attacking Kavanaugh—full stop. It is unbecoming to
block him simply because they want to, and they risk alienating
intelligent people who see the obvious: He is the most qualified
conservative for the job.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Lisa Blatt heads the Supreme Court practice at Arnold & Porter. She has
argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court. These are her personal views.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/02/im-a-liberal-feminist-heres-why-i-support-judge-kavanaugh-219081





I’m a Liberal Feminist Lawyer. Here’s Why Democrats Should Support Judge
Kavanaugh.

By LISA BLATT

August 02, 2018

The Friday Cover

Sometimes a superstar is just a superstar. That is the case with Judge
Brett Kavanaugh, who had long been considered the most qualified nominee
for the Supreme Court if Republicans secured the White House. The Senate
should confirm him.

I have argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court, more than any other
woman. I worked in the Solicitor General’s Office for 13 years during
the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations. Because I am a liberal
Democrat and feminist, I expect my friends on the left will criticize me
for speaking up for Kavanaugh. But we all benefit from having smart,
qualified and engaged judges on our highest court, regardless of the
administration that nominates them.

What happened to Merrick Garland was a disgrace. His nomination was the
Democratic equivalent of Kavanaugh’s. Garland, too, is brilliant,
admired, experienced, sober and humane. Indeed, Kavanaugh himself called
Garland “supremely qualified” for the Supreme Court. That he made that
statement while Garland’s nomination was pending—and was the subject of
intense partisan warfare—says a great deal about Kavanaugh’s character.

But unless the Democrats want to stand on the principle of an eye for an
eye—and I don’t think they should—folks should stop pretending that
Kavanaugh or his record is the issue. He is supremely qualified.
Although this fact is distressing, Republicans control both the White
House and Senate. In comparable circumstances, when President Barack
Obama was in office, our party appointed two justices to the Supreme Court.

I first met Kavanaugh in 2009, shortly after I left the Solicitor
General’s Office. He spontaneously emailed to say he liked an article I
had written for The Green Bag, an irreverent legal magazine, about my
experience arguing in front of the Supreme Court. I had just started my
own appellate practice, and his note was extremely thoughtful.

Months later, I asked Kavanaugh to join a panel at Georgetown Law School
to review a film about college debate. He responded that he knew nothing
about debate but nevertheless was happy to help. When a law student
asked him how debate had shaped his career, he answered: “I actually
never debated, but I did play football, and the two are basically the
same.” He then offered this advice: “Practice, learn to get along with
all of your teammates, learn from your mistakes, and have fun.” It was
clear that judge cared about mentoring and teaching law students and was
invested in helping others to succeed.



Since then, I’ve kept in regular contact with the judge, mostly to talk
about kids and work-life balance, including the challenges I’ve had as a
woman trying to raise two children while practicing law. Kavanaugh is a
great listener, and one of the warmest, friendliest and kindest
individuals I know. And other than my former boss, Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, I know of no other judge who stands out for hiring female law
clerks. My profession is overrun with men, and unless institutions like
the Supreme Court do more to hire women, the upper echelons of my
profession will never fully include women.

I do not have a single litmus test for a nominee. My standard is whether
the nominee is unquestionably well-qualified, brilliant, has integrity
and is within the mainstream of legal thought. Kavanaugh easily meets
those criteria. I have no insight into his views on Roe v.
Wade—something extremely important to me as a liberal, female Democrat
and mother of a teenage girl. But wh**ever he decides on Roe, I know it
will be because he believes the Constitution requires that result.

It’s easy to forget that the 41 Republican senators who v**ed to confirm
Ginsburg knew she was a solid v**e in favor of Roe, but nonetheless
v**ed for her because of her overwhelming qualifications. Just as a
Democratic nominee with similar credentials and mainstream legal views
deserves to be confirmed, so too does Kavanaugh—not because he will come
out the way I want in each case or even most cases, but because he will
do the job with dignity, intelligence, empathy and integrity.

Democrats should quit attacking Kavanaugh—full stop. It is unbecoming to
block him simply because they want to, and they risk alienating
intelligent people who see the obvious: He is the most qualified
conservative for the job.
Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

Lisa Blatt heads the Supreme Court practice at Arnold & Porter. She has
argued 35 cases before the Supreme Court. These are her personal views.