Hawaii’s U.S. Sens. Brian Schatz and Mazie Hirono dismissed the FBI’s “so-called investigation” into sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh on Thursday, and Schatz expressed dismay at the actions of the Senate during the fiercely emotional and partisan Kavanaugh controversy.
“The country is feeling torn apart and the Senate has traditionally played a role in calming tensions down, moving methodically and being fair, and this process is doing none of that,” Schatz said in an interview Thursday. “It is not thorough, it is not fair and it is not designed to get at the truth.”
Many hoped the FBI would dig deeper into the allegations made by Christine Blasey Ford, a California university professor who said Kavanaugh held her down, covered her mouth to muffle her screams and attempted to pull her clothes off at a party when they were teenagers in 1982.
During a Senate floor speech on Thursday, Hirono said it was becoming clear that the White House had rigged the investigation. “The president claimed to want the FBI to do a ‘comprehensive’ investigation, but that didn’t happen,” she said. “This so-called investigation is a sham. It is a fig leaf for the Republicans to hide behind. It is a talking point for their continued and predictable criticism of Democrats. ‘See?’ they will say. ‘You wanted an FBI investigation and you got one. But now it isn’t good enough for you.’
“Well, it wasn’t good enough for me. And it shouldn’t be good enough to satisfy the American people,” she said.
Schatz said he had already planned to vote against Kavanaugh because of his positions on health care, abortion rights and Native Hawaiian issues, “but this process has been an abomination and an abdication of the Senate’s role.”
“It was not an investigation,” Schatz said. “It was a collection of interviews.”
He said confidentiality rules prevented him from disclosing details of the report, which he described as incomplete and unserious.
Meanwhile, more than a dozen professors from the University of Hawaii’s William S. Richardson School of Law added their signatures to an open letter opposing Kavanaugh on the basis of his demeanor and the statements he made during is confirmation hearing. The letter was delivered to the Senate on Thursday.
“We regret that we feel compelled to write to you, our Senators, to provide our views that at the Senate hearings on Sept. 27, Judge Brett Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land,” according to the letter.
The letter, published in the opinion section of The New York Times, was signed by more than 2,400 law professors, including UH professors Melody Kapilialoha MacKenzie, Mari Matsuda, Charles R. Lawrence III, Linda Hamilton Krieger and Mark A. Levin.
Levin, who like Kavanaugh is a Yale Law School alumni, said that while there was much about the nominee to debate, Kavanaugh demonstrated last week he is “injudicious.”
Levin said he signed the letter because he is concerned that “his being on the court will harm that court, which is the most important judicial institution in the country.”
“You look at what he showed about his manner of dealing with people who deserve enormous respect, including our senator, and his manner of dealing with them in an inappropriate way, and I have deep concerns that this person could be granted a lifetime appointment to that position that has incredible power over all of our lives,” he said.
In her remarks in the Senate, Hirono described Kavanaugh’s judicial record as “deeply ideological and outcome driven. He remains a fierce political partisan operative. And he holds troubling legal views on Native Hawaiians, Native Americans, and Alaska Natives.”
Hirono said she had already decided to oppose Kavanaugh by the end of his first hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, but she became even more concerned during the second committee hearing when he testified about Ford’s sexual misconduct allegation.
Kavanaugh “launched into a partisan political screed that contradicted everything he has ever professed to believe about the way judges should behave,” Hirono said.
“He was angry. He was belligerent. He was partisan. He went on the attack. He argued with senators. He forgot who was there to ask the questions and who was there to answer them. These are not qualities we look for in a Supreme Court justice,” Hirono told her colleagues.
The Senate is expected to take an initial procedural vote to end debate on Kavanaugh’s confirmation today, and a final vote is possible as early as Saturday. Schatz said he does not know which way the vote will go, and declined to speculate on what is likely to happen.
“The Senate has to do better in handling difficult situations, and this has been deeply emotional for everyone,” Schatz said. “The historic role at times has been that the Senate can be the adults in the room, and we did not rise to the occasion.”
