Trump Watch: How Kavanaugh Avoided the T-Word | Papadopoulos Sentence
Kavanaugh hewed closely to one philosophy throughout this confirmation hearing: Only trouble awaits the judge who wades too far into political territory.
September 07, 2018 at 07:07 PM
7 minute read
Welcome back to Trump Watch, after a long day in the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearing room. We're off two marathon days of senators questioning U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, so read below for my look back at how Kavanaugh dealt with the “T-word.” Plus, George Papadopoulos, the former Trump campaign foreign policy adviser who pleaded guilty last fall to lying to federal investigators, was sentenced Friday.
➤➤ Having a hard time keeping up with all the news? We've got updates below on a number of stories. You can also stay up to speed on Trump's judicial nominations and confirmations with our Gavel Tracker at the end of the newsletter.
As always, thanks for reading, and let me know about the interesting developments in your world: You can find me at [email protected], or on Twitter.
|
The Three Ways Kavanaugh Stayed “Three Zip Codes Away” from Trump
It was obvious before Brett Kavanaugh was picked for the Supreme Court that Senate Democrats would use the man who named him—President Donald Trump—as a bludgeon against the nomination. That was especially apparent during this week's confirmation hearing.
Yet, Kavanaugh hewed closely to one philosophy throughout the barrage of questions: Only trouble awaits the judge who wades too far into political territory. The nominee praised Trump's diligence in his judicial selection process, but avoided revealing any criticism of the president. Here are three ways Kavanaugh stayed away from any controversy involving Trump:
➤➤ Trump has never shied away from criticizing federal judges, including U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel for the Southern District of California, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Chief Justice John Roberts. One Democratic senator asked him about the attacks on Thursday, but Kavanaugh avoided those treacherous waters. When Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut, repeatedly probed him on his views of Trump's comments on Ginsburg—Trump once tweeted that her mind was “shot”—Kavanaugh declined to directly answer. “I've maintained I'm not going to get within three ZIP codes of a political controversy here,” Kavanaugh said.
That came as a surprise to some senators. Justice Neil Gorsuch expressed disappointment at Trump's attacks during his nomination. “When anyone criticizes the honesty or the integrity, the motives of a federal judge, well, I find that disheartening, I find that demoralizing, because I know the truth,” Gorsuch told Blumenthal during his confirmation hearings. Asked if that included Trump, Gorsuch repeated, “Anyone is anyone.”
➤➤ Trump's Twitter account again came up during the hearings when Sen. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican and a prominent critic of the president, invited Kavanaugh to comment on a weekend Trump tweet attacking the “Jeff Sessions Justice Department” for the prosecution of two Trump-aligned congressmen. Again, Kavanaugh didn't want to weigh in. “I think one of the principles of judicial independence that judges … and nominees need to be careful about is commenting on current events or political controversies,” he said.
When Flake rephrased his question, Kavanaugh said an “underappreciated aspect”of Chief Justice John Roberts was the tone he set for keeping the judiciary out of politics. “That tone of not getting us involved in politics means I need to stay not just away from the line, but three zip codes away from the line of current events or politics, so I understand but I respectfully decline,” Kavanaugh said.
➤➤ On the topic of last year's white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, which ended in the death of a counter protester, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-California, asked Kavanaugh if he believed both sides were to blame. (You will, of course, recall that Trump used that phrase.)
“One of the principles I've talked about throughout this hearing is the independence of the judiciary, and one of the things judges do is, following the lead of a chief justices and what all judges do… is stay out of commenting on current events, because it risks confusion about what our role is. We are judges who decide cases and controversy; we're not pundits, we don't comment on current events. We stay out of political controversy,” Kavanaugh replied.
|
George Papadopoulos Sentenced to 14 Days
George Papadopoulos, the former Trump campaign adviser who pleaded guilty last October to lying to federal investigators, has found out his fate. U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss sentenced him to 14 days' imprisonment Friday.
The order came after prosecutors sought up to six months behind bars for the 31-year old, detailing in a sentencing memo how Papadopoulos' false statements impeded the early stages of the FBI's probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Robert Stanley, an attorney for Papadopoulos, asked the judge in a filinglast week for a probation-only sentence with immediate termination. You can find the details of Papadopoulos' sentence from my colleague C. Ryan Barber here.
➤➤Speaking of interesting court hearings, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office in D.C., and Robert Driscoll, the defense lawyer for alleged Russian agent Maria Butina, will be back in court on Monday for a status conference hearing. In case you haven't been following, Driscoll is seeking review of Butina's detention in jail, while prosecutors believe a gag order is “warranted” for Driscoll. They've said his frequent comments to the media could interfere with a fair trial.
|
This Week in Trump Watch: Manafort's Trial Stays in D.C. | Concord Management Drops an Appeal | Judges, Judges, Judges Confirmed
➤➤ There's little surprise here: Paul Manafort's upcoming federal trial will stay put in Washington, D.C. On Wednesday, District Judge Amy Berman Jackson denied the Manafort legal team's bid to move his September trial to Roanoke, Virginia. Defense lawyers had hoped to move there, citing western Virginia's less liberal jury pool, and the less aggressive media coverage of Manafort.
➤➤ Jackson also ruled on Wednesday that lawyers won't be allowed to raise the ongoing special counsel investigation into the Trump campaign's ties to Russia during Manafort's D.C. trial, set to begin with jury selection Sept. 17. The government can mention Manafort's role as Trump campaign chair in a limited context. Jackson has deferred ruling on a number of other motions in limine, including whether lawyers can raise arguments of selective or vindictive prosecution, and whether the government can introduce evidence or testimony from lawyers who have previously advised Manafort on Foreign Agents Registration Act filing requirements.
➤➤ Hoping to attend the trial? Read Judge Jackson's rules of the road here.
➤➤ While the third day of Kavanaugh's hearing was underway Thursday, the Senate voted to confirm eight Trump nominees for federal trial courts. Senators confirmed by voice vote six judges: Marilyn Horan (Western District of Pennsylvania), William Jung (Middle District of Florida), Kari Dooley (District of Connecticut), Robert Summerhays (Western District of Louisiana), Eric Tostrud (District of Minnesota), and Alan Albright (Western District of Texas).
➤➤ The Senate also confirmed Charles Williams to the Northern District of Iowa, 79-12, and Dominic Lanza to the District of Arizona, 60-35.
➤➤ The Reed Smith attorneys repping Concord Management—the Russian troll farm indicted by the special counsel in February—are dropping their appeal of a Washington federal judge's order rejecting their bid to dismiss the charges. Check out the Thursday filing here.
Thanks for checking out our Gavel Tracker. How do we count up these numbers? The count on Article III pending nominations is the sum of all of Trump's nominees to Article III courts, including the U.S. Court of International Trade. Our court-by-court breakdown, however, only looks at Supreme Court, appellate, and district court nominees. Additionally: Our figure for pending nominations includes nominations for future vacancies, as well as existing vacancies.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part II: GOP Pols Push Misinformation, Cohen Keeps It Together
1 minute readTrump Barred From Appearing on Illinois Ballot as Overarching SCOTUS Decision Looms
4 minute readThe Judiciary's Electronic Court System Gets Poor Marks | Plus, A Look at Judicial Noms' Pay
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Justices Will Weigh Constitutionality of Law Allowing Terror Victims to Sue PLO
- 2Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 3OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 44th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 5Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250