It is odd to have a secret report generated AFTER the defense testimony has been given under oath to the Judiciary Committee... Danger! x 3
On the other hand, here's Judge Nap on Kav's record
...4 minute clip starts with Natural Rights, so some may recoil in horror.
That video is troublesome.
On the other hand, I'm wondering if some of Judge K's opinions were written to be consistent with previous court precedence. In other words, he probably had his own personal opinions that were contrary to the opinions of the SCOTUS but didn't express them. Could he have written his opinions, regardless of his own feelings, to be consistent with Court precedence?
The reason that I am wondering about this is that in order to keep from being controversial, and in so doing get the SCOTUS nomination, he had to go along with the crowd. I don't have the case at my fingertips now but I believe he wrote and opinion for Kennedy which was consistent with Roe V. Wade. Then during questioning about his feelings on abortion, his answers made the left uneasy. Of course, anything he would say would make the left uneasy but the subject of abortion, for them was particularly unnerving.
Then in later questioning, he was asked if the SCOTUS ever made a mistake. His reply was yes. The cases he cited were the Dred Scott case and Plessy V. Ferguson. That put the Democrats in a tight spot. They could whine about his views on abortion all day long but can't argue with both of his observations on the aforementioned cases involving slavery and racial discrimination.
To sum this up, I'm wondering if he has the attitude of; "I will have to write my opinions to be consistent with what the SCOTUS has already said but when I get on the bench, I don't have to be PC and I'll say whatever I want to. The pro-life crowd and gun rights supporters will have a friend in me?"
I'm not trying to say that's what I believe are Judge K's feelings but wondering if he is using the same tactic that other so-called "conservative" judges have used in the past. You know the ones like Souter, Kennedy and Roberts. They pretend to be conservative for a Republican President then flip when they get on the bench. In this case, could Judge K be pretending to be middle of the road but secretly very conservative?