[T-Bird45]

“...because he is and was a conservative Constitutional fundamentalist...”

That’s probably a bit more than is merited for a Bush White House staffer and Bush nominee to the DC Circuit Court. He is a career-long denizen of the Swamp and was a SCOTUS clerk for Kennedy, a Justice in the middle, the ever-swaying “swing vote”. Yes, his work on the DC Circuit Court has had some notable deicisons/opinions, often in the minority so it was without real effect in that moment. Let’s wait to see how these eggs hatch into chickens before we apply the label of “next Justice Thomas” to him.

[familyop]

Facts trump feminist rhetoric. The following is fact. For potential nominees, a long record including important decisions does trump a short record without important decisions. It's not the sex or animal instincts that count. The greatest proof of good work is most conducive to public trust.

Heller v. D.C. - Appeals (2010-2011, not the 2008 case)
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/DECA496973477C748525791F004D84F9/%24file/10-7036-1333156.pdf#page=46

[Excerpts:]

“KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judge, dissenting:...
[...]
In my judgment, both D.C.’s ban on semi-automatic rifles and its gun registration requirement are unconstitutional under Heller.

In Heller, the Supreme Court held that handguns – the vast majority of which today are semi-automatic – are constitutionally protected because they have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens. There is no meaningful or persuasive constitutional distinction between semi-automatic handguns and semi-automatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles, like semi-automatic handguns, have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens for self-defense in the home, hunting, and other lawful uses. Moreover, semi-automatic handguns are used in connection with violent crimes far more than semi-automatic rifles are. It followsfrom Heller’s protection of semi-automatic handguns that semi-automatic rifles are also constitutionally protected and that D.C.’s ban on them is unconstitutional.
[...]
In my view, Heller and McDonald leave little doubt that courts are to assess gun bans and regulations based on text, history, and tradition, not by a balancing test such as strict or intermediate scrutiny.”

[NKP_Vet]

The pro-life female that replaces RBG will be the “swing vote” that will send Roe v. Wade right where it belongs, to the ash heap of history. It should have never been heard by the Supreme Court. Abortion is the purview of
the states.

https://youtu.be/Rj_MhS2u-Pk