Here & Now

Kavanaugh Nomination Moves Forward

Frederica Freyberg:
At week’s end, the U.S. Senate vote to confirm the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court is on pace to happen this weekend. This follows the culmination of an FBI review and difficult testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Partisans rage on this process to confirm a justice, but what is the more measured take from a jurist who served on our State Supreme Court? We turn to former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske who joins us now in Milwaukee and thanks very much for doing so.

Janine Geske:
I’m happy to do it.

Frederica Freyberg:
Not that either of us were privy to it, but how do you think the FBI investigation helped or didn’t help this process?

Janine Geske:
Well, I think, one, it helped just to slow it down a little bit because emotions were obviously running high. And I think it was an attempt to see if more information couldn’t be gained by at least interviewing a few witnesses. Obviously from the reactions from the parties, they didn’t learn anything new. But meanwhile a lot of witnesses are doing interviews on television, so there’s a lot of extraneous information coming in. Ultimately, I think that the senators that have the tough decision in that final vote, it didn’t help them much and they’re going to have to make a decision whether they think Judge Kavanaugh has the qualifications to be on the court.

Frederica Freyberg:
As you watched the Senate hearing of the testimony and questions for Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh, what were your feelings both as a jurist and a citizen?

Janine Geske:
Well, in watching Dr. Ford, she was, as most people commented, an incredibly compelling witness. She sounded credible. Her answers are consistent with the kinds of answers one would expect from someone who had been assaulted a long time ago. She was very, very believable. In terms of Judge Kavanaugh, you know, I understood his anger, but his rage surprised me. What really surprised me is how disrespectful he was to the Democratic Senators. And that’s something you’d never see in a courtroom. I’m sure he wouldn’t put up with it in a courtroom. And I was surprised at some of the denials of things that happened in high school and in college. I think he would have been much better off to admit that, you know, it was a rough time and that he drank a lot and engaged in some behavior he’s not particularly happy with, rather than the denials that he made, which makes him, mind you, less credible.

Frederica Freyberg:
So what does that say in your mind about his judicial temperament?

Janine Geske:
Well, you know, it’s interesting. You know, I think that it’s difficult based on the evidence to conclude that he committed this sexual assault. And that’s not to take away from Dr. Ford’s testimony. It’s just that it’s so long ago and by the nature of the assault, you know, this isn’t corroboration. But, on the other hand, I think that his what appeared to be rage by Judge Kavanaugh and anger and disrespect was pretty shocking to me. And I think that’s what shocked a lot of people, judges and lawyers around the country, that you wouldn’t expect that from a judge or a judicial candidate. That raised real serious questions as to whether or not he has the kind of decorum and temperament that is appropriate for a very important position on a court.

Frederica Freyberg:
So you say it raised serious questions, but in your mind would he be unqualified to serve?

Janine Geske:
Well, that’s a hard question. You know, I think it’s in the eyes of the beholder. He’s obviously qualified in terms of his background and his studies, and he clearly knows the law, can write the law. And I think we have to give something to him that if you’re wrongfully accused, at least that’s what he says, of these assaults, that you’d get very, very angry about it. And I’m sure it’s been very difficult for his family and himself. It made me uncomfortable. I don’t know if I were in a position of a Senator that I would support him after having seen that. I suspect — I saw he wrote an editorial saying I’m not that way ordinarily and I’m very even-handed judge, I always have been. And I suspect he has. That maybe that can overcome that. But it certainly would give me pause if I had to vote because they’re giving someone a lifetime appointment and whatever he is, you get that for the rest of his life or as long as he wants to be there. And with so many other candidates, that would concern me.

Frederica Freyberg:
You also spoke to the idea that he was disrespectful toward the U.S. Senators during that testimony, but what do you think of the partisan nature of some attacks he really leveled against the Democrats?

Janine Geske:
Well, that was over the line, too. And, you know, it was hand in hand of the disrespectful comments and then talking about being a hit job and terrible things that were done. And then throwing in the Clintons was really shocking. I mean I didn’t expect to have heard that. It really goes to show the hatred he has about some of the Clintons’ activities earlier on in their careers. Well, you know, that was a terrible, terrible time for him, I think compared to his prior interviews, both during the hearings and also interviews on television. He was very measured and thoughtful. And we saw a side of him that we have not seen before. I don’t know how much of that is because President Trump probably told him that he needed to do that, but in my view, I want a judge who’s calm and methodical and open-minded. And at least the judge we saw during that part of the hearing wasn’t that.

Frederica Freyberg:
Would you think that should he be confirmed and serve on the high court that he would have to recuse himself in some of these kinds of matters because of his performance and testimony?

Janine Geske:
Well, that’s interesting, you know. I always think about that even in judicial races that are very, very vicious and hard. What that does to that judicial candidate, ultimately judge, in terms of their view towards a party that has done that. I think — not that there be a matter with the Clintons, but there could be that come up to the court. I don’t think he could sit on that. But I think, you know, in terms of whether there are things impacting the Democratic Party and so on, I don’t think it’s probably enough for him to recuse himself. But you do wonder where that anger will continue throughout his judicial career now that he and he says his family have been devastated by what he believes are these wrongful accusations.

Frederica Freyberg:
All right. Supreme Court — former Supreme Court Justice Janine Geske, thank you very much for joining us.

Janine Geske:
You’re welcome.