2012-2025 Form

It has been said that Kavanaugh has never tried a case to its conclusion as a lead attorney before a court.Which is true.He went from being a law clerk to working for Bush on the 2000 election fray, then working for Ken Starr on interrogation of Bill Clinton and preparation of Starr's case which led to the impeachment of Pres. Clinton. Then he worked in the Bush White House before being nominated by Bush to be a judge on Chief Justice Merrick Garland's court, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Garland, his boss, of course, never got a hearing.During his testimony I kept asking myself "has this guy ever even been in a court?" When he said that he had demanded a hearing "the next day" after hearing of Dr. Ford's comments I wondered how he could think that anyone got a hearing "the next day" if he had courtroom experience?FACT CHECK: Did Brett Kavanaugh 'Never Try a Case' Before Being Promoted...Regarding the ABA ratings:From the outset in 2003, even with an earlier rating of “Well Qualified” for this nominee, there were considerations arising from confidential interviews and other background information that act to explain the thread of “Qualified” running through the Standing Committee evaluations. The 2003 confidential record makes it clear that there were then-present concerns regarding this nominee’s breadth of professional experience. It was noted that he had never tried a case to verdict or judgment; that his litigation experience over the years was always in the company of senior counsel; and that he had very little experience with criminal cases. Indeed, it is the circumstance of courtroom experience that fills the transcripts that make the record before the (DC) Court of Appeals, and concerns were expressed about the nominee’s insight into that very process. Nonetheless, a substantial majority saw other overriding factors that supported a rating of “Well Qualified.”Subsequent to that rating the 2006 review reduced his rating to Qualified.The additional interviews conducted in 2006 expanded upon those earlier concerns.One judge who witnessed the nominee’s oral presentation in court commented that the nominee was “less than adequate” before the court, had been “sanctimonious,” and demonstrated “experience on the level of an associate.”A lawyer who had observed him during a different court proceeding stated: “Mr. Kavanaugh did not handle the case well as an advocate and dissembled.”Other lawyers expressed similar concerns, repeating in substance that the nominee was young and inexperienced in the practice of law.Further, the 2006 interviews raised a new concern involving his potential for judicial temperament. Unlike the earlier 2003 final report and 2005 updated report,the recent supplemental evaluation contained comments from several interviewees with more recent experience with the nominee, which caused them to characterize the nominee as “insulated.”One interviewee suggested that much of his concern about the nominee’s being insulated was due, understandably, to the nominee’s current position as Staff Secretary to the President. However, this interviewee remained concerned about the nominee’s ability to be balanced and fair should he assume a federal judgeship. And another interviewee echoed essentially the same thoughts:“(He is) immovable and very stubborn and frustrating to deal with on some issues.”‘Unfathomable’: More than 2,400 law professors sign letter opposing Kavanaugh’s confirmation