The following is a response to a Politico op-ed by Supreme Court litigator Lisa Blatt, entitled “I’m a Liberal Feminist Lawyer. Here’s Why Democrats Should Support Judge Kavanaugh.”

Sometimes a superstar is just a superstar. And sometimes a superstar is a powerful Republican with the power to decide whether my clients will win or lose billions of dollars. That is the case with Judge Brett Kavanaugh. The Senate should confirm him.

I am a partner a law firm where “profits per partner measured out at almost $1.2 million in 2017.” Because I am a liberal Democrat and feminist, I expect my friends on the left will criticize me for speaking up for Kavanaugh. But my clients will all benefit from having smart, qualified and engaged judges on our highest court who feel like I did them a solid by trading on my liberal credentials in order to boost their chances of getting confirmed.

Those clients, by the way, include Philip Morris and PhRMA. I’m also “the legal mind behind the Redskins ‘Take Yo Panties Off’ trademark defense.”


What happened to Merrick Garland was a disgrace. His nomination was the Democratic equivalent of Kavanaugh’s. Well, I guess they’re kind of the same. Okay, really they are only equivalent if you completely ignore how they’ve behaved on the bench.

Like when SeaWorld trainer Dawn Brancheau was killed by a whale that mauled her and then pulled her underwater until she drowned — the third time this particular whale killed someone while in captivity — Chief Judge Garland joined an opinion rejecting SeaWorld’s argument that “working with killer whales was not a recognized hazard because its training and safety program adequately controlled the risk.” Again, their argument was that working with killer whales was not a recognized risk. And this particular killer whale was a repeat offender.

Judge Kavanaugh, meanwhile, wrote a dissenting opinion claiming that the Department of Labor cannot protect whale trainers from dangerous workplaces, because that would be like regulating “tackling in the NFL or speeding in NASCAR.”

Did I mention that one of my clients is an NFL team?

Also, in Garza v. Hargan, Garland voted in favor of a woman that the Trump administration literally held prisoner to prevent her from obtaining an abortion. Kavanaugh dissented in that case too. Oh, and Kavanaugh frequently attacks the EPA’s efforts to protect the environment, while Garland takes a much lighter hand with federal agencies.

So the two guys are basically the same.

But unless the Democrats want to stand on the principle of an eye for an eye—and I don’t think they should—folks should stop pretending that Kavanaugh or his record is the issue. He is supremely qualified. Although this fact is distressing, Republicans control both the White House and Senate. It’s especially distressing because Donald Trump lost the popular vote and the 49 Senate Democrats represent nearly 40 million more people than the 51 Republicans. But I want you to ignore that fact.


I once asked Kavanaugh to join a panel at Georgetown Law School to review a film about college debate. He responded that he knew nothing about debate but nevertheless was happy to help. I think that the fact that Judge Kavanaugh is willing to opine on subjects that he, by his own admission, knows nothing about is a positive trait in a Supreme Court justice.

I do not have a single litmus test for a nominee. My standard is whether the nominee is unquestionably well-qualified, brilliant, has integrity, and is within the mainstream of legal thought. I have no insight into Kavanaugh’s views on Roe v. Wade. Or, at least, I’m willing to say that I have no insight into his views on Roe –even though I am one of the most accomplished Supreme Court litigators of my generation and I am more than qualified to analyze Kavanaugh’s opinion in Garza or the transcript of a speech he gave last year where he criticized Roe v. Wade.

Just as a Democratic nominee with similar credentials and mainstream legal views deserves to be confirmed, so too does Kavanaugh—not because he will come out the way I want in each case or even most cases, but because he will do the job with dignity, intelligence, empathy, and integrity. My support for him has nothing to do with the fact that I earn a living by practicing before the Supreme Court and that I have a financial interest in ingratiating myself to someone who could potentially join that Court.

Democrats should quit attacking Kavanaugh—full stop. It is unbecoming to block him simply because they want to, and they risk alienating intelligent people. Like my clients.