The appearance of a double standard for judicial behavior is at issue this morning, given the angry moments that embattled Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh displayed before the Senate Judiciary Committee during Thursday’s hearing.

CNN Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin put a fine point at where we now stand in the confirmation hearings noting that Thursday was in some sense transcendent as it moved the conversation surrounding the confirmation vote from Roe vs Wade to his judicial temperament.

Toobin opined “It’s like a more holistic evaluation of his qualifications, including his performance at the hearing, just the way he behaved in the way of judicial temperament, and that should all figure in, not just did he lie about drinking at Yale.”

New Day co-host Alisyn Camerota then cited the American Bar Association’s guidelines of impartiality suggesting that Kavanaugh’s overtly political allegations (blaming the Clintons?) under testimony might be disqualifying.

“There’s that” replied Toobin then noting Kavanaugh’s yelling at Senators Whitehouse and Klobuchar before mentioning again what he called “the question that hangs over all of this, that if a woman behaved the way that Brett Kavanaugh behaved, they probably would have put a net over her and pulled her out of the hearing room.”

While many understand how the alleged Kafka-esque trial might bring out passionate indignance (which was on full display by the Trump nominee) others feel that his behavior went beyond the pale of what is expected by someone eager to sit on the nation’s highest court.

While Dr. Christine Ford and Kavanaugh had very different stories to tell during Thursday’s testimony, their demeanor and energy were remarkably different in tenor and style. That measured difference could have a lasting impact on the makeup of the Supreme Court.

Watch the clip above courtesy of CNN.

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]