Kavanaugh suggested a president should be protected from subpoena. He said SCOTUS might’ve been wise to stay out of the tapes dispute. “Should U.S. v. Nixon be overruled on the ground that the case was a nonjusticiable intrabranch dispute? Maybe so.” apnews.com/3ea406469d344d…
2/ U.S. v. Nixon was 8-0, including 3 Nixon appointees. It is a celebrated and historic decision, a foundation for the rule of law, that presidents are not above the law. Reasonable lawyers will tell you, if candid, that Kavanaugh's view was way out of the mainstream.
3/Kavanaugh:“Maybe Nixon was wrongly decided -heresy though it is to say so.[It] took away the power of the president to control information in the executive branch by holding that the courts had power...to order the president to disclose information in response to a subpoena..."
4/ "...sought by a subordinate executive branch official. That was a huge step with implications to this day that most people do not appreciate sufficiently...Maybe the tension of the time led to an erroneous decision.”
Wow.
U.S. v. Nixon led to the fair resolution of Watergate.
Wow.
U.S. v. Nixon led to the fair resolution of Watergate.
5/ Odd pattern with Kavanaugh?
He seems most excited to overturn big cases decided by wide margins:
U.S. v. Nixon (8-0)
Humphrey's Executor (9-0)
Morrison v. Olson (7-1)
Roe v. Wade (7-2)
Vote count isn't everything, but he's not such a deferential judge.
slate.com/news-and-polit…
He seems most excited to overturn big cases decided by wide margins:
U.S. v. Nixon (8-0)
Humphrey's Executor (9-0)
Morrison v. Olson (7-1)
Roe v. Wade (7-2)
Vote count isn't everything, but he's not such a deferential judge.
slate.com/news-and-polit…
