Readers React: No, Brett Kavanaugh’s anger at Senate Democrats doesn’t disqualify him from the Supreme Court

Judge Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 27.
Judge Brett Kavanaugh testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 27.
(Win McNamee / Getty Images)

To the editor: Virginia Heffernan’s column on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s temperament and partisanship disqualifying him for a seat on the Supreme Court is outrageously bad.

Kavanaugh became the victim of a scheme by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), in which she denied both Kavanaugh and his accuser Christine Blasey Ford privacy in dealing with these allegations. This riled up Kavanaugh, and understandably so.

For Heffernan to display her holier-than-thou attitude, by using Kavanaugh’s understandable anger over having his life ruined, against him betrays a strategy that many people who have been bullied out of a workplace know: Make a person angry with public accusations, and when he or she reacts, feign astonishment about the person’s behavior and conclude that he or she has unfortunately become unacceptable for the work environment.


Michael Esser, Los Angeles


To the editor: Kavanaugh applied for a job. He went through a long interview process with a hiring committee.

Information was provided to the committee suggesting that there was some disqualifying behavior in his past. He was asked to “testify” about the disqualifying behavior. Instead of providing information, he denied the behavior and then proceeded to complain very publicly about the hiring committee members and the hiring process.

He still wants the job. If that were you or me, would we get hired?

Pamela Ford, Redlands


To the editor: I fully understand that many have concerns about Kavanaugh’s temperament during his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Sept. 27, but I do not understand why his opening statement is being interpreted as excessively partisan.

In my view, he was calling out the Democrats for being politically motivated, and I don’t think it is partisan to oppose partisanship — or, if it is, how could one ever oppose it?

Peter Marston, Glendale


To the editor: Though I would not characterize the Supreme Court as “magic,” I agree with Heffernan that adding Kavanaugh to it would only magnify its partisanship, right-wing power, disregard for women and underrepresented persons, and protection of corporate interests at the expense of ordinary citizens.

The United States is at a disturbing point in its history. We have an almost useless, hopelessly divided and rancorous Congress. We are stuck with a profoundly erratic, mendacious president who is at once authoritarian, corrupt and narcissistic. To be blunt, we are teetering toward banana public status.

Confirming Kavanaugh would only worsen what Congress and the president have been doing. Indeed, he would be a compliant handmaiden for future disastrous actions by GOP leadership in both those branches. Given his intemperate tendencies and dubious character traits, the court would be further weakened by his presence.

Kavanaugh would not be a beacon for truth, justice, fairness or any magical enlightenment in this dark age for America.

Joseph DeVitis, Rancho Mirage

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook