he was concerned about a nominee who would really take his side in those cases. not out of bias, but out of kind of his view of the jurisprudence. he did really well with brett kavanaugh. since, tom, thanks to attorney general sessions, everyone who watches television news can now recite the definition of the word recusal. wouldn t there be grounds for him to recuse himself from a case having to do with the president who just appointed him to the court? no. there will be a lot of people would would think that and be concerned about the appearance of bias. but the rules about recusal in the supreme court are very, very, very tough because you can t replace a justice once they step out. so it is actually quite rare for a justice to take themselves out of a case. it s only when they ve been personally involved. so, for example, if he had heard a case on the d.c. circuit he would be recused in the supreme court. but the fact that president trump nominated him would not lead him to take
i think what democrats need to do now is really look at what kavanaugh has said about the presidential power and about a president being whether a president should be under investigation. and there is some debate about what his article that he wrote the minnesota law journal. exactly. we think he ll get grilled on that. and he should. because whether or not trump picked him because he seems to have this view of the strong executive, many people will think that is why he was picked. people expect that of donald trump to look out for himself first and foremost. if kavanaugh cares about his own reputation and integrity of the court and what the american public thinks about the supreme court and its independence, then he better have some good answers for that and he really should voluntarily recuse himself. he doesn t have to but he could voluntarily recuse himself from any cases growing out of the scenario about criminal
kavanaugh has said about the presidential power and about a president being whether a president should be under investigation. and there is some debate about what his article that he wrote the minnesota law journal. exactly. we think he ll get grilled on that. and he should. because whether or not trump picked him because he seems to have this view of the strong executive, many people will think that is why he was picked. people expect that of donald trump to look out for himself first and foremost. if kavanaugh cares about his own reputation and integrity of the court and what the american public thinks about the supreme court and its independence, then he better have some good answers for that and he really should voluntarily recuse himself. he doesn t have to but he could voluntarily recuse himself from any cases growing out of the
this is in many ways not the beginning of the 2020 race, but it certainly is related to it. but the court certainly does have a tendency to surprise. i say to those who are about to set their hair on fire, at least wait until morning. of the justices that nixon appointed justin renquist recused himself. the other three voted to make nixon turn over the tapes, which was the precipitating event that actually led to nixon s resignation. three of his appointees went that way. earl warren went in eisenhower wasn t quite sure what he was going to get. things do unfold. these are human institutions. if you re really concerned about judge kavanaugh, you need to get out and elect someone else president.
coffee, bedside, and otherwise. so many kindle and associated systems for good reason. a lot of barrooms. so many are in the dark of the supreme court development. you remind us so well, it s been worse, it s been darker. but we re hearing from folks, especially on the political left, this is bad, this is for keeps, at least for a couple of generations. what do you say to them? i know it feels cataclysmic. and each of these nominations tends to feel like the thunderdome meets c-span somehow. but the country does have a way, the court does have a way, by and large, of reflecting the middle of the country. and there are dramatic exceptions to that. but the court now is proof that presidential elections matter enormously. clarence thomas, ginsburg, breyer, alito, kagan, gorsuch, kavanaugh, that s an even span over the past four or five presidents we ve had. what we need to insist on, in