Matt McClain/The Washington Post via AP kavanaugh confirmation Washington Post calls for Kavanaugh's rejection in rare editorial rebuke

The Washington Post published an editorial Friday urging the Senate to reject Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavnaugh, the newspaper's first editorial opposing such a nominee in more than 30 years.

The Post's editorial was published the morning of a critical Senate vote to advance Kavanaugh's nomination, with a final vote expected this weekend. The Post cited Kavanaugh's partisan rhetoric and emotive behavior during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing last week on allegations of sexual misconduct against him, as well as what the editorial board felt was insufficient information for senators to make an informed decision.


Though the newspaper admitted it would have preferred a more moderate pick to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, who had been the court's swing vote, it said Kavanaugh's conservative views were not a reason for its opposition.

The last time the Post openly opposed a Supreme Court nomination was Robert H. Bork, who was nominated by Ronald Reagan in 1987 and was rejected by a Democrat-controlled Senate. Bork was criticized for his bombastic behavior in committee hearings, considered inappropriate for a judicial nominee.

During his hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, convened to address allegations of sexual assault against him, Kavanaugh levied accusations that Senate Democrats had conspired against him in “a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election” and “revenge on behalf of the Clintons.”

Before his appointment to the federal bench, Kavanaugh worked in the White House of President George W. Bush and in the office of independent counsel Ken Starr, whose probe led to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton.

Morning Media Your guide to the media circus — weekday mornings, in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The accusation echoed the sentiments of multiple Republicans, who criticized Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the Judiciary Committee's ranking member, for keeping the allegations against Kavanaugh private for weeks.

The Post editorial argued such rhetoric from the Supreme Court nominee could be an indicator of future partisanship on the Supreme Court.

The editorial board also feared Kavanaugh could be a pawn for President Donald Trump in the light of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. The editorial quoted Kavanaugh “obsequiously” claiming “no president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination.” It also cited Kavanaugh’s penchant for executive deference and declining to comment on how he would handle cases involving Trump.

The Post also cited what it felt was insufficient information and evasiveness from Kavanaugh, and a tepid drive from Senate Republicans to fill in the gaps. In addition to dodging questions concerning his behavior in high school, Kavanaugh did not sufficiently account for several of his decisions as a federal judge during the Bush administration, the editorial argued.

Both Trump and Senate Republicans curtailed investigations to gather more information on Kavanaugh, the editorial alleged, leaving too much doubt in the nominee’s past for Senators to confirm him.

“Unfortunately — and unnecessarily; it didn’t have to be this way — too many questions remain about his history for senators to responsibly vote ‘yes,’” the editorial board wrote. “At the same time, enough has been learned about his partisan instincts that we believe senators must vote ‘no.'”