News and analysis right to your inbox. Click to get Ballotpedia’s newsletters!

Brett Kavanaugh

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Brett Kavanaugh
Nonpartisan
Supreme Court of the United States
Tenure
2018 - Present
Years in position
7
Predecessor: Anthony Kennedy (Nonpartisan)
Prior offices:
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
Years in office: 2006 - 2018
Predecessor: Laurence Silberman (Nonpartisan)
Education
Bachelor's
Yale, 1987
Law
Yale Law, 1990
Personal
Birthplace
District of Columbia

Brett Kavanaugh is an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. President Donald Trump (R) nominated him to the Court on July 9, 2018, to fill the vacancy left by Anthony Kennedy upon his assumption of senior status. The United States Senate confirmed Kavanaugh in a 50-48 vote, and he was sworn into office on October 6, 2018.[1][2][3]

During his SCOTUS nomination hearings, Kavanaugh responded to allegations of sexual assault from several women. Kavanaugh denied the allegations and accused them of "a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election."[4][5][6] Click here to read more statements from Kavanaugh's nomination hearings.

Prior to joining the Court, Kavanaugh served as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit from 2006 to 2018. Bush unsuccessfully nominated Kavanaugh to the court in 2003 and again in 2005—the Senate did not vote on the nominations. On January 25, 2006, Bush renominated Kavanaugh and the U.S. Senate confirmed him in May of that year.[1][7][8][9]

Prior to his judicial service, Kavanaugh worked as counsel to the president from 2001 to 2006. From 1994 to 1998, Kavanaugh worked in the office of U.S. Solicitor General Kenneth Starr and was a primary author of the Starr Report on potentially impeachable acts by President Bill Clinton (D).[10] Concurrently, he worked for private law firm Kirkland & Ellis. Later, he assisted President George W. Bush's (R) legal team in the U.S. Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore (2000). Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett also assisted Bush's legal team.[7][11] Kavanaugh began his legal career clerking for U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit Judge Walter Stapleton, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Judge Alex Kozinski, and then in 1993, he became a clerk for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.[7]

Kavanaugh has described his jurisprudence as textualist, viewing judges as umpires. In 2016, writing for the Catholic University Law Review, Kavanaugh outlined his 10 principles for judge as umpire, "[T]o be a good judge . . . we must keep learning. We do not know it all. . . . We have to constantly learn. We should draw from the law reviews and the treatises that professors have worked on for years to study a problem that we may have a couple of days to focus on. We should study the briefs and precedents carefully and challenge our instincts or prior inclinations. We are not the font of all wisdom."[12]

In a 2018 lecture, Kavanaugh said, "As I see it, the Constitution is primarily a document of majestic specificity, and those specific words have meaning, which absent constitutional amendment continue to bind us as judges, legislators, and executive officials ... changes to the constitutional laws are to be made by the people through the amendment process and, where appropriate, through the legislative process, not by the courts snatching that constitutional or legislative authority for themselves."[13][14]


While on the U.S. Supreme Court, Kavanaugh's notable opinions have included:

  • A 5-4 opinion in Arizona v. Navajo Nation (2023), holding the U.S. government was not responsible to secure water for the Navajo Nation.
  • A 5-4 opinion in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta (2022), a ruling expanding federal and state prosecutorial power on tribal land.
  • joined the 6-3 majority opinion and wrote a concurrence in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022), overturning the constitutional right to have an abortion.
  • A 5-4 opinion in McKinney v. Arizona (2020), holding that a state appellate court could reweigh aggravating or mitigating circumstances in cases concerning the death penalty.
  • A 5-4 opinion in Barton v. Barr (2020), holding that lawful permanent residents who commit certain crimes become legally ineligible for cancellation of removal relief.

As a circuit judge, Kavanaugh’s notable opinions include a concurrence in Klayman v. Obama (2015) on the constitutionality of government data collection, and a dissent in abortion case Garza v. Hargan (2017).

Judicial nominations and appointments

United States Supreme Court (2018-present)

See also: Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court
See also: Supreme Court vacancy, 2018: An overview
Nomination Tracker
Fedbadgesmall.png
Nominee Information
Name: Brett M. Kavanaugh
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Progress
Confirmed 88 days after nomination.
ApprovedANominated: July 10, 2018
ApprovedAABA Rating: Unanimously Well Qualified
Questionnaire: Questionnaire
ApprovedAHearing: September 4-7, 2018, September 27, 2018
QFRs: (Hover over QFRs to read more)
ApprovedAReported: September 28, 2018 
ApprovedAConfirmed: October 6, 2018
ApprovedAVote: 50-48

On June 27, 2018, Justice Anthony Kennedy announced he was retiring from the U.S. Supreme Court effective July 31, 2018. In an official release, Kennedy cited a desire to spend more time with his family as the reason for his retirement.[15] Kennedy was considered by many to be the Court's swing vote, often casting the deciding vote between the conservative and liberal members.[16]

On July 9, President Donald Trump (R) nominated Brett Kavanaugh to succeed Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court. Trump offered remarks on the nomination:[17]

“ Judge Kavanaugh has impeccable credentials, unsurpassed qualifications, and a proven commitment to equal justice under the law. A graduate of Yale College and Yale Law school, Judge Kavanaugh currently teaches at Harvard, Yale, and Georgetown. Throughout legal circles, he is considered a judge’s judge, a true thought leader among his peers. He is a brilliant jurist with a clear and effective writing style, universally regarded as one of the finest and sharpest legal minds of our time. And just like Justice Gorsuch, he excelled as a clerk for Justice Kennedy.[18] ”
—President Donald Trump



Kavanaugh stopped hearing cases or issuing opinions on the D.C. Circuit while his confirmation was pending.[19]

The American Bar Association rated Kavanaugh Well Qualified for the nomination.[20]

The Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on Kavanaugh's nomination from September 4 to September 7 and again September 27.[21] On the fourth day of hearings, Kavanaugh responded to allegations of sexual assault: Palo Alto University psychology professor and research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez, and Georgetown Preparatory School classmate Julie Swetnick accused Kavanaugh of sexual crimes against them in the 1980s. Kavanaugh denied the allegations and accused the women of "a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election."[4][5]

On September 28, 2018, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-10 along party lines to report Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate for a confirmation vote.[22] The Senate voted 51-49 to invoke cloture and end debate on Kavanaugh’s nomination on October 5, 2018.[23][24] Click here to read more statements from Kavanaugh's nomination hearings.

The U.S. Senate confirmed Kavanaugh's nomination October 6 on a recorded vote of 50-48-1.[21] Click here for more information about Kavanaugh's nomination and confirmation.


Remarks in response to nomination

On July 9, 2018, Kavanaugh issued the statement below after President Trump announced his nomination:[25][26]

“ Mr. President, thank you. Throughout this process, I have witnessed firsthand your appreciation for the vital role of the American judiciary. No president has ever consulted more widely or talked with more people from more backgrounds to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination. Mr. President, I am grateful to you and I am humbled by your confidence in me. Thirty years ago, President Reagan nominated Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court. The framers established that the constitution is designed to secure the blessings of liberty. Justice Kennedy devoted his career to securing liberty. I am deeply honored to be nominated to fill his seat on the Supreme Court.


My mom and dad are here. I am their only child. When people ask what it’s like to be an only child, I say it depends on who your parents are. I was lucky. My mom was a teacher. In the 1960's and 70's, she taught history at two largely African-American public high schools in Washington DC. – McKinley Tech and H.D. Woodson. Her example taught me the importance of equality for all Americans. My mom was a trailblazer. When I was 10, she went to law school and became a prosecutor. My introduction to law came at our dinner table when she practiced her closing arguments. Her trademark line was, “use your common sense, what rings true, what rings false.” That’s good advice for a juror and for a son. One of the few women prosecutors at that time, she overcame barriers and became a trial judge. The president introduced me tonight as Judge Kavanaugh. But to me, that title will always belong to my mom. My dad went to law school at night while working full-time. He has an unparalleled work ethic and has passed down to me his passion for playing, and watching, sports. I love him dearly.

The motto of my Jesuit high school was, “Men for Others.” I’ve tried to live that creed. I spent my career in public service from the executive branch in the White House to the U.S. court of appeals for the D.C. circuit. I’ve served with 17 other judges, each of them, a colleague and a friend. My judicial philosophy is straightforward. A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law. A judge must interpret statutes as written and a judge must interpret the constitution as written, informed by history and tradition, and precedent.

For the past 11 years, I’ve taught hundreds of students, primarily at Harvard law school. I teach that the Constitution’s separation of powers protects individual liberty and I remain grateful to the dean who hired me – Justice Elena Kagan. As a judge, I hire four law clerks each year. I look for the best. My law clerks come from diverse backgrounds and points of view. I am proud that a majority of my law clerks have been women. I am part of the vibrant Catholic community in the D.C. area. The members of that community disagree about many things, but we are united by a commitment to serve. Father John Enzler is here. Forty years ago, I was an altar boy for Father John. These days, I help him serve meals to the homeless at Catholic charities.

I have two spirited daughters. Margaret and Liza. Margaret loves sports and she loves to read. Liza loves sports and she loves to talk. I have tried to create bonds with my daughters like my dad created with me. For the past seven years, I have coached my daughter’s basketball teams. The girls on the team call me Coach K. I am proud of our Blessed Sacrament team that just won the city championship.

My daughters and I also go to lots of games. Our favorite memory was going to the historic Notre Dame-UConn women's basketball game at this year's Final Four. Unforgettable. My wife Ashley is a west Texan, a graduate of Abilene Cooper public high school and the University of Texas. She is now the town manager of our community. We met in 2001 when we both worked in the White House. Our first date was on September 10, 2001. The next morning, I was a few steps behind her as the secret service shouted at all of us to sprint out the front gates of the White House because there was an inbound plane. In the difficult weeks that followed, Ashley was a source of strength for President Bush and for everyone in this building. Through bad days and so many better days, since then, she has been a great wife and inspiring mom. I thank God every day for my family.

Tomorrow I begin meeting with members of the Senate which plays an essential role in this process. I will tell each Senator that I revere the constitution. I believe that an independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic. If confirmed by the Senate, I will keep an open mind in every case and I will always strive to preserve the constitution of the United States and the American rule of law. Thank you, Mr. President.[18]

”
—Brett Kavanaugh (July 9, 2018)

District of Columbia Court of Appeals (2006-2018)

On the recommendation of the Congressional Delegation for the District of Columbia, President George W. Bush (R) nominated Kavanaugh to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on February 25, 2006, to a seat vacated by Laurence Silberman as Silberman assumed senior status. The U.S. Senate confirmed Kavanaugh by a vote of 57-36 on May 26, 2006. He received commission on May 29. Fifty-three Republicans and four Democrats voted "yea," and seven members did not vote. Of the Democrats voting in favor, only Tom Carper (Del.) was still in the Senate as of July 9, 2018.[27]

Click here to read the transcript of Kavanaugh's 2006 confirmation hearings.

Biography

Born in Washington, D.C. in 1965, Kavanaugh attended Georgetown Preparatory School. He graduated from Yale College with his bachelor's degree in 1987 and from Yale Law School with his J.D. in 1990.[1][28] He received a bachelor’s degree in history from Yale University in 1987 and a law degree from Yale Law School in 1990.[7]

Kavanaugh was a clerk to former Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit, and Judge Walter Stapleton of the Third Circuit.[1][7][28] In 2017 during his confirmation hearings to the U.S. Supreme Court, U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) tendered written questions to Kavanaugh about his clerkship with Kozinski, specifically, if he had any knowledge of Kozinski's misconduct. Kavanaugh denied remembering any inappropriate behavior, saying as well that he was surprised by Kozinski's sexual misconduct allegations. Kozinski was accused of sexual misconduct, ranging from harassment to assault, by more than 15 women. Kozinski resigned from the bench. The Guardian reported that his behavior was widely known in the judiciary.[29][30]

Kavanaugh held a one-year fellowship in the Office of the Solicitor General of the United States under Kenneth Starr. During that time, he worked on the Whitewater Investigation.[31]

Kavanaugh was also a partner at the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis and served as an associate counsel in the Office of Independent Counsel.[32]

After George W. Bush (R) was elected as president, Kavanaugh was senior associate counsel and associate counsel to the president and then served as assistant to the president and staff secretary. Kavanaugh was serving in this role when Bush nominated him to the D.C. Circuit, and he was sworn in June 1, 2006.[33]


Professional career



Approach to the law

In a 2017 speech before the American Enterprise Institute on former Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Kavanaugh said, "[a]s I see it, the Constitution is primarily a document of majestic specificity, and those specific words have meaning. Absent constitutional amendment, those words continue to bind us as judges, legislators, and executive officials."[34]

Oyez, a law project created by Cornell’s Legal Information Institute, Justia, and Chicago-Kent College of Law, identified Kavanaugh as a member of the court's conservative bloc. It said that while on the D.C. Circuit, Kavanaugh "predictably established a conservative track record on a range of hot-button issues."[35]

At SCOTUSBlog, Adam Feldman wrote in July 2020 that "Although conservatives might have envisioned Kavanaugh’s arrival at the court – replacing the more moderate Kennedy – as likely to solidify a strong right wing on the court, this has not been clearly the case. [John] Roberts and Kavanaugh have both been frequent members of the court’s majority in each of the past two terms, with Roberts in the majority appreciably more this term (97%) than last (85%), and Kavanaugh at 93% this term compared to 88% last term."[36]

Martin-Quinn score

Kavanaugh's Martin-Quinn score following the 2023-2024 term was 0.53, making him the fifth-most conservative justice on the court at that time. Martin-Quinn scores were developed by political scientists Andrew Martin and Kevin Quinn from the University of Michigan, and measure the justices of the Supreme Court along an ideological continuum. The further from zero on the scale, the more conservative (>0) or liberal (<0) the justice. The chart below details every justice's Martin-Quinn score for the 2023-2024 term. These are preliminary scores provided by Kevin Quinn that may differ slightly from the final version of the scores that Martin and Quinn will make publicly available at a later date.

Video discussion

Kavanaugh spoke at The Heritage Foundation in October 2017 about his White House experience, life as a federal judge, and his approach to the Constitution. The video of that event is embedded below.

Views on the administrative state

Separation of powers and Chevron deference

The New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA), a public interest law firm that, according to its website, aims at protecting what it calls "constitutional liberties from systemic threats, primarily the administrative state," published an assessment of potential replacements for Justice Anthony Kennedy based on how each of them approached questions about the administrative state.[37][38]

Its assessment held that Kavanaugh would oppose attempts by administrative agencies to consolidate legislative, executive and judicial powers into the same hands.[37] Kavanaugh had raised concerns about potential conflicts between the operations of the administrative state and the principle of separation of powers:[37]

“
In his 12 years sitting on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, Kavanaugh has developed a consistent, albeit nuanced, approach to adjudicating matters related to the administrative state. Kavanaugh believes agencies cannot regulate outside the boundaries of their statutory authority under any circumstance. Independent agencies pose significant constitutional challenges—Judge Kavanaugh has described them as a “headless fourth branch of the U.S. Government.” Kavanaugh has warned that since independent agencies exercise “massive power [in] the absence of Presidential supervision and direction, independent agencies pose a significant threat to individual liberty and to the constitutional system of checks and balances.” Courts should be wary of regulation adopted by independent agencies because there is a problem of accountability, given the President’s inability to supervise their activities. Kavanaugh has suggested that the judiciary is at least partly to blame for the growing concentration of power in independent agencies. Courts have served as enablers to Congress’ unconstitutional transfer of its legislative authority to the executive branch.[18] 		”

Kavanaugh had a record of examining the practice of Chevron deference, an administrative law principle that compels federal courts to defer to a federal agency's interpretation of an ambiguous or unclear statute that Congress delegated to the agency to administer:[37]

“

Judge Kavanaugh notes that “ambiguity-dependent canons” such as Chevron raise particular concern because “the doctrine is so indeterminate—and thus can be antithetical to the neutral, impartial rule of law—because of the initial clarity versus ambiguity decision.” He has also expressed concern with Chevron because the doctrine “has no basis in the Administrative Procedure Act.” Because Chevron is “an atextual invention by courts,” Kavanaugh asserts that Chevron deference “is nothing more than a judicially orchestrated shift of power from Congress to the Executive Branch.”

Moreover, Judge Kavanaugh’s experience in the White House has led him to observe additional practical political problems with Chevron. Chevron encourages the Executive Branch—regardless of the person or party in control—to be “extremely aggressive” in trying to advance policy through agency action. Kavanaugh sees the Supreme Court’s King v. Burwell decision as a limitation on Chevron’s deference regime though, removing from its ambit the class of cases that pose “question[s] of deep economic and political significance.” To Kavanaugh, Burwell begs the question: if the major rules doctrine requires a court not to apply Chevron, why should Chevron apply to cases involving less major questions? [...]

Judge Kavanaugh has not been a crusader looking for an excuse to overturn Chevron on the D.C. Circuit. In fact, he has said that applying “Chevron makes a lot of sense in certain circumstances.” Kavanaugh believes that when “Congress delegates the decision to an executive branch agency that makes the policy decision … that the courts should stay out of it for the most part.” His principal concern with Chevron is not that courts should never defer to agencies, it is that the doctrine is often incorrectly applied to defer to agencies in circumstances that have little to do with the reasonableness of agencies’ expressly delegated policy decisions.[18]

”

Auer deference

Kavanaugh discussed his opposition to Auer deference during a keynote address at George Mason University Law School in June 2016. His remarks featured a summary of former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent in Decker v. Northwest Environmental Defense Center, which argued against Auer deference on the grounds that it violates the separation of powers. Kavanaugh himself went on to predict that Auer deference would eventually be overruled:[39]

“ Decker, as [Justice Scalia] explained, Auer violates a fundamental principle of separation of powers: that the power to write a law and the power to interpret it cannot rest in the same hands. Justice Scalia pointedly noted that Auer was not a logical corollary to Chevron, but a dangerous permission slip for the arrogation of power. In the end Justice Scalia said that Auer ‘contravenes one of the great rules of separation of powers, he who writes a law must not adjudge its violation.’ On the law, Justice Scalia explained that Auer is one big, unexplained, unjustified ipse dixit, and there could be no doubt, he pointed out that it has huge practical consequences for individual liberty when the law writer is also the law interpreter. In short, I predict that Auer will someday be overruled and that Justice Scalia's dissent in Decker will be the law of the land.[18] ”


Supreme Court statistics

Opinions by year

Below is a table of the number of opinions, concurrences, and dissents that Kavanaugh has issued since joining the Supreme Court according to the annual Stat Pack produced by the website SCOTUSBlog. This information is updated annually at the end of each term.[40] Information for the 2022 term is from a dataset provided by Dr. Adam Feldman, author of Empirical SCOTUS. Data for the 2022-2023 term does not include concurrences and dissents in part. Information for the 2023-2024 term is from the Empirical SCOTUS 2023 Stat Review.

Opinions written by year, Brett Kavanaugh
2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
Opinions 7 6 6 5 7 6
Concurrences 5 5 7 8 6 7
Dissents 2 3 2 1 0 3
Totals 14 14 15 14 13 16

Justice agreement

In the 2023-2024 term, Kavanaugh had the highest agreement rate with John Roberts. Kavanaugh had the lowest agreement rate with Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.[41] In the 2022-2023 term, he had the highest agreement rate with John Roberts. He had the lowest agreement rate with Clarence Thomas.[42] This does not include agreements in part.[43]

The table below highlights Kavanaugh's agreement rate with each justice on the court during that term.[44][45]


Brett Kavanaugh agreement rates by term, 2018 - Present
Justice 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024
John Roberts 94% 93% 94% 100% 95% 95%
Clarence Thomas 80% 78% 78% 79% 73% 78%
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 63% 67% N/A N/A N/A N/A
Stephen Breyer 70% 70% 73% 62% N/A N/A
Samuel Alito 91% 80% 86% 89% 80% 84%
Sonia Sotomayor 64% 65% 66% 54% 78% 69%
Elena Kagan 70% 71% 72% 63% 80% 69%
Neil Gorsuch 70% 88% 87% 73% 82% 75%
Amy Coney Barrett N/A N/A 91% 89% 91% 90%
Ketanji Brown Jackson N/A N/A N/A N/A 80% 71%

Frequency in majority

In the 2023-2024 term, Kavanaugh was in the majority in 95 percent of decisions. He was in the majority more often than seven of the other justices.[41]In the 2022-2023 term, Kavanaugh was in the majority in 96 percent of decisions. He and Chief Justice John Roberts were in the majority more often than the other justices.[42][40][46][47]

Since joining the court during the 2018-2019 term, Kavanaugh has been in the majority more than 80 percent of the time six times. Across these terms, he has been in the majority on average 94 percent of all cases.[41]




Noteworthy cases

See also: Noteworthy cases heard by current justices on the U.S. Supreme Court

The noteworthy cases listed in this section include any case where the justice authored a 5-4 majority opinion or an 8-1 dissent. Other cases may be included in this section if they set or overturn an established legal precedent, are a major point of discussion in an election campaign, receive substantial media attention related to the justice's ruling, or based on our editorial judgment that the case is noteworthy. For more on how we decide which cases are noteworthy, click here.



Since he joined the court through the 2022 term, Kavanaugh authored the majority opinion in a 5-4 decision ten times and has not authored a dissent in a 8-1 decision. The table below details these cases by year.

Brett Kavanaugh noteworthy cases
Year 5-4 majority opinion 8-1 dissenting opinion
Total 10 0
2022-2023 2 0
2021-2022 1 0
2020-2021 1 0
2019-2020 4 0
2018-2019 2 0

U.S. Supreme Court noteworthy opinions


D.C. Circuit opinions


Noteworthy events

Attempted assassination plot (2022)

On June 8, 2022, Sophie Roske—known at the time as Nicholas John Roske—traveled from California to Kavanaugh's home in Maryland with plans to break into his home, kill him, and then kill herself. Roske later spoke to her motivation in an FBI affidavit: she was angry about the leaked opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) ruling that there was no constitutional right to abortion and wanted to reverse that outcome, she was angry about the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, and she believed that Kavanaugh would vote to ease gun control laws. Roske intended to kill three justices, explaining, “all of the major decisions for the past 10 years have been along party lines so if there are more liberal than conservative judges, they will have the power.”[64][65][66][67]

Roske arrived at Kavanaugh's home armed, observed U.S. Marshals outside Kavanaugh's residence, then texted her sister explaining her intentions. Her sister convinced her to call 911. She told the operator she was having suicidal ideation, she self-reported that was armed and had planned to kill a U.S. Supreme Court justice. The police arrived while she was on the line and she was arrested without incident.[68][69][70][71]

In September 2025, Roske came out as a trans woman, identifying herself as Sophie and using she/her pronouns in court communications. She was charged under her legal name, Nicholas.[72]

On October 3, 2025, Judge Deborah Boardman on the United States District Court for the District of Maryland sentenced Roske to eight years imprisonment with a lifetime of supervised release. During sentencing, Boardman said, "[the plan] to kill a Supreme Court justice in an attempt to change a Supreme Court ruling and the composition of the court is absolutely reprehensible and will be punished.” Boardman added:[73][74][75][76]

“ This is an atypical defendant and an atypical case. ... Though she got far too close to executing her plans, the fact remains she abandoned them ... Sophie Roske’s admission of guilt and effort to come clean did not occur after or even because she was caught in the act by police. … If she had not called 911, law enforcement would never have known about Sophie Roske and her plot to kill a Supreme Court justice.[18] ”
—Judge Boardman


In a letter, Roske apologized to Kavanaugh and his family:[77]

“ I would like to begin by apologizing to [The Justice] and his family. I put them through a harrowing experience and for that I am truly sorry. I am very glad I did not continue. I am also sorry for contributing to a trend of political violence in American politics. I can see now how destructive and misguided such acts are, and am ashamed to have not recognized these things sooner.[18] ”
—Sophie Roske

In a statement to the court, Roske apologized:[78]

“ I sincerely apologize to the justice and his family for the considerable distress I put them through. ... I have been portrayed as a monster, and this tragic mistake I made will follow me for the rest of my life. I also realized how twisted my thinking and sense of self can become when my mental health is at its worst.[18] ”
—Sophie Roske


Kavanaugh did not testify or submit a victim impact statement during the proceedings, nor did he attend the proceedings or offer public comment afterward.[79]


Tested positive for coronavirus on September 30, 2021

See also: Politicians, candidates, and government officials diagnosed with or quarantined due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, 2020
Covid vnt.png
Coronavirus pandemic
Select a topic from the dropdown below to learn more.


On October 1, 2021, the Supreme Court announced in a press release that Kavanaugh tested positive for COVID-19 on September 30. The press release said Kavanaugh was fully vaccinated at the time he contracted the virus.[80]

Hearing and investigations into sexual assault allegations made during SCOTUS confirmation process (2018)

See also: Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court

During his SCOTUS nomination hearings, Kavanaugh responded to allegations of sexual assault: Palo Alto University psychology professor and research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez, and Georgetown Preparatory School classmate Julie Swetnick accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault and misconduct during the 1980s. Kavanaugh denied the allegations and accused the women of "a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election."[4][5][81][82][83][84]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) conducted a supplemental background investigation into the allegations brought by Ford and Ramirez. They did not interview Swetnick.[85]

On October 5, 2018, the office of U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said the investigation "[confirmed] what the Senate Judiciary Committee concluded after its investigation: there is no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez."[86] Ford's attorneys said in a post on Twitter that the FBI did not interview Ford or witnesses who could corroborate her account and that "those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth."[87][88] Democratic congressional members claimed that Grassley and the Republican majority on the Senate Judiciary Committee were seeking cover to push the nomination through, rather than establishing the facts. The Republicans claimed that the Democrats only sought to delay the nomination process.[89]

On October 25, 2018, Grassley's office announced that Swetnick and her attorney, Michael Avenatti, were being referred to the U.S. Department of Justice for criminal investigation, citing inconsistencies between her original sworn statement and an interview with NBC News.[90]

For more information on the allegations and Kavanaugh's responses, click here.

About the courts

U.S. Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the country and leads the judicial branch of the federal government. It is often referred to by the acronym SCOTUS.[91]

The Supreme Court consists of nine justices: the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices. The justices are nominated by the president and confirmed with the "advice and consent" of the United States Senate per Article II of the United States Constitution. As federal judges, the justices serve during "good behavior," which means that justices have tenure for life unless they are removed by impeachment and subsequent conviction.[92]

The Supreme Court is the only court established by the United States Constitution (in Article III); all other federal courts are created by Congress.

The Supreme Court meets in Washington, D.C., in the United States Supreme Court building. The Supreme Court's yearly term begins on the first Monday in October and lasts until the first Monday in October the following year. The court generally releases the majority of its decisions in mid-June.[92]

To read opinions published by this court, click here.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

District of Columbia Circuit
Court of Appeals
US-CourtOfAppeals-DCCircuit-Seal.png
Judgeships
Posts: 11
Judges: 11
Vacancies: 0
Judges
Chief: Sri Srinivasan
Active judges:
Julianna Michelle Childs, Bradley Garcia, Karen Henderson, Greg Katsas, Patricia Ann Millett, Florence Pan, Cornelia T. L. Pillard, Neomi Rao, Srikanth Srinivasan, Justin Walker, Robert Leon Wilkins

Senior judges:
James Buckley, Harry Edwards, Douglas Ginsburg, Arthur Randolph, Judith Rogers, David Sentelle, David Tatel


The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is a federal appellate court with appellate jurisdiction. It hears appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and its rulings may be appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States.

This court should not be confused with the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, which is equivalent to a state supreme court in the District of Columbia, or with the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, whose jurisdiction is limited by subject matter. Appeals are heard in the E. Barrett Prettyman Federal Courthouse in Washington, D.C.

Eight judges of the District of Columbia Circuit went on to serve on the Supreme Court of the United States: Fred M. Vinson, Wiley Rutledge, Warren Burger, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, and Brett Kavanaugh.


To read opinions published by this court, click here.

See also


External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Federal Judicial Center, "Kavanaugh, Brett M.," accessed October 23, 2025
  2. ↑ CNN, "Brett Kavanaugh sworn in as Supreme Court justice," October 6, 2018
  3. ↑ U.S. Senate, "Vote Summary: Question: On the Nomination (Confirmation Brett M. Kavanaugh, of Maryland, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)," accessed October 23, 2025
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 The Washington Post, "Brett Kavanaugh and allegations of sexual misconduct: The complete list," September 27, 2018
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 CNN, "The moments that defined the Christine Blasey Ford-Brett Kavanaugh hearing," September 28, 2018
  6. ↑ The New York Times, "The Women Who Have Accused Brett Kavanaugh," September 26, 2018
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 Britannica, "Brett Kavanaugh," accessed October 23, 2025
  8. ↑ U.S. Government Publishing Office, "Conformation hearing on the nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh to be Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit," April 27, 2004
  9. ↑ Cornell Law School, "Brett M. Kavanaugh, Associate Justice (2018-present)," accessed August 6, 2024
  10. ↑ Oyez, "Brett Kavanaugh," accessed October 23, 2025
  11. ↑ CNN, "Supreme Court is about to have 3 Bush v. Gore alumni sitting on the bench," October 7, 2020
  12. ↑ Catholic University Law Review, "The Judge as Umpire: Ten Principles," June 22, 2016
  13. ↑ Politico, "What Brett Kavanaugh Really Thinks," August 6, 2018
  14. ↑ Congressional Research Service, "Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh: His Jurisprudence and Potential Impact on the Supreme Court," Updated August 21, 2018
  15. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Press Releases," June 27, 2018
  16. ↑ Oyez, "Anthony M. Kennedy," accessed October 28, 2025
  17. ↑ C-SPAN, "Judge Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court Nomination Announcement," July 9, 2018
  18. ↑ 18.00 18.01 18.02 18.03 18.04 18.05 18.06 18.07 18.08 18.09 18.10 18.11 18.12 18.13 18.14 18.15 18.16 18.17 18.18 18.19 18.20 18.21 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  19. ↑ Law 360, "Judge Kavanaugh Stops DC Circ. Work For Confirmation Fight," July 17, 2018
  20. ↑ American Bar Association "Ratings of Article III and Article IV judicial nominees," archived September 30, 2018
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 Congress.gov, "PN2259 — Brett M. Kavanaugh — Supreme Court of the United States," accessed October 8, 2018
  22. ↑ Senate Judiciary Committee, "Results of Executive Business Meeting – September 13, 2018," September 13, 2018
  23. ↑ U.S. Senate, "Vote Summary: Question: On the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture Re: Brett M. Kavanaugh to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States)," October 5, 2018
  24. ↑ NPR, "Kavanaugh Has The Votes To Be Confirmed To The Supreme Court," October 5, 2018
  25. ↑ The Washington Post, "Watch Brett Kavanaugh's full acceptance speech after Trump nomination," July 9, 2018
  26. ↑ C-SPAN, "Judge Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court Nomination Announcement," July 9, 2018
  27. ↑ Congress.gov, "PN1179 — Brett M. Kavanaugh — The Judiciary," archived June 14, 2015
  28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 Biography, "Brett Kavanaugh," archived March 26, 2023
  29. ↑ The Intercept, "How One Senator Cornered Brett Kavanaugh About His Mentor’s Sexually Explicit Emails," September 25, 2018
  30. ↑ The Guardian, " Kavanaugh clerk hire casts light on link to judge forced to quit in #MeToo era," October 1, 2018
  31. ↑ The New York Times, "The Partisan Battle Brett Kavanaugh Now Regrets," August 4, 2018
  32. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Potential nominee profile: Brett Kavanaugh," June 28, 2018
  33. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court Historical Society, "The Current Court: Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh," accessed November 3, 2025
  34. ↑ American Enterprise Institute, "From the Bench: The Constitutional Statesmanship of Chief Justice William Rehnquist," accessed April 16, 2021
  35. ↑ Oyez, "Brett Kavanaugh," accessed August 13, 2019
  36. ↑ SCOTUSBlog, "Final Stat Pack for October Term 2019 (updated)," July 10, 2020
  37. ↑ 37.0 37.1 37.2 37.3 New Civil Liberties Alliance, "NCLA Ranks the Short List of Candidates to Replace Justice Kennedy," accessed April 16, 2021
  38. ↑ "New Civil Liberties Alliance", "Mission," accessed April 16, 2021
  39. ↑ Common Dreams, "Kavanaugh Has Publicly Discussed Cases Before, Including Those He Would Like to Overturn," September 5, 2018
  40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 SCOTUSblog, "STAT PACK for the Supreme Court’s 2021-22 term," July 1, 2022
  41. ↑ 41.0 41.1 41.2 Empirical SCOTUS, "2023 Stat Review," July 1, 2024
  42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 Empirical SCOTUS, "Another One Bites the Dust: End of 2022/2023 Supreme Court Term Statistics," November 16, 2023
  43. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "STAT PACK for the Supreme Court’s 2021-22 term," accessed November 16, 2023
  44. ↑ Due to a change in the 2020 stat pack format, the agreement rate uses the rate of agreement in judgment.
  45. ↑ Due to a change in the 2021 stat pack format, the agreement rate uses the rate of agreement in judgment.
  46. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "2020-21 Stat pack: Frequency in the majority," July 2, 2021
  47. ↑ SCOTUSblog, "Frequency in the Majority," accessed September 21, 2020
  48. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Williams v. Reed, decided February 21, 2025
  49. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Arizona v. Navajo Nation, decided June 22, 2023
  50. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, Coinbase, Inc. v. Bielski, decided June 23, 2023
  51. ↑ 51.0 51.1 U.S. Supreme Court, Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, decided June 29, 2022
  52. ↑ 52.0 52.1 U.S. Supreme Court, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, decided June 24, 2022
  53. ↑ U.S. Supreme Court, TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, decided June 25, 2021
  54. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, McKinney v. Arizona, decided February 25, 2020
  55. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Barton v. Barr, decided April 23, 2020
  56. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Thole v. U.S. Bank, decided June 1, 2020
  57. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Manhattan Community Access Corp. v. Halleck, decided June 17, 2019
  58. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, "Apple Inc. v. Pepper," May 13, 2019
  59. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Garza v. Hargan, decided October 24, 2017
  60. ↑ Lyle Denniston Law News, "LARRY ELLIOTT KLAYMAN, ET AL., APPELLEES v. BARACK OBAMA, ET AL., APPELLANTS," case decided November 16, 2015
  61. ↑ U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, EME Homer City Generation v. EPA, decided August 21, 2012
  62. ↑ Supreme Court of the United States, Environmental Protection Agency v. EME Homer City Generation L.P., decided April 29, 2014
  63. ↑ Oyez, "Environmental Protection Agency v. EME Homer City Generation," accessed November 5, 2025
  64. ↑ Associated Press, "California resident gets over 8 years in prison for attempt to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh," October 3, 2025
  65. ↑ CNN, "FBI says man accused of attempting to kill Brett Kavanaugh said he was ‘shooting for 3’ justices," July 27, 2022
  66. ↑ Politico, "Man charged with plotting to kill Kavanaugh asks judge to exclude evidence against him," January 3, 2025
  67. ↑ Associated Press, "Feds: Kavanaugh plotter sought to alter court ‘for decades’," July 28, 2022
  68. ↑ Associated Press, "California resident gets over 8 years in prison for attempt to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh," October 3, 2025
  69. ↑ CNN, "FBI says man accused of attempting to kill Brett Kavanaugh said he was ‘shooting for 3’ justices," July 27, 2022
  70. ↑ Politico, "Man charged with plotting to kill Kavanaugh asks judge to exclude evidence against him," January 3, 2025
  71. ↑ Associated Press, "Feds: Kavanaugh plotter sought to alter court ‘for decades’," July 28, 2022
  72. ↑ Associated Press, "California resident gets over 8 years in prison for attempt to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh," October 3, 2025
  73. ↑ POLITICO, " Would-be Kavanaugh assassin sentenced to over 8 years in prison," October 3, 2025
  74. ↑ Associated Press, "California resident gets over 8 years in prison for attempt to assassinate Justice Kavanaugh," October 3, 2025
  75. ↑ Politico, "Man charged with plotting to kill Kavanaugh asks judge to exclude evidence against him," January 3, 2025
  76. ↑ U.S. Department of Justice, "California Man Pleads Guilty to Attempted Murder of Supreme Court Justice in Maryland," April 8, 2025
  77. ↑ Court Listener, "IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND: MEMORANDUM IN ADVANCE OF SENTENCING," filed September 19, 2025
  78. ↑ POLITICO, " Would-be Kavanaugh assassin sentenced to over 8 years in prison," October 3, 2025
  79. ↑ POLITICO, " Would-be Kavanaugh assassin sentenced to over 8 years in prison," October 3, 2025
  80. ↑ WOWT, "Justice Kavanaugh tests positive for COVID-19, has no symptoms," October 1, 2021
  81. ↑ The New York Times, "The Women Who Have Accused Brett Kavanaugh," September 26, 2018
  82. ↑ Washington Post, "California professor, writer of confidential Brett Kavanaugh letter, speaks out about her allegation of sexual assault," September 16, 2018
  83. ↑ The New Yorker, "Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years," September 23, 2018
  84. ↑ USA Today, "Third woman makes sexual misconduct allegations about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh," September 26, 2018
  85. ↑ The Guardian, "Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick to be excluded from FBI investigation," September 30, 2018
  86. ↑ USA Today, "GOP releases summary of FBI report on Kavanaugh: 'No corroboration of the allegations'," October 5, 2018
  87. ↑ Washington Post, "In 2: 30 a.m. tweets, White House says FBI report supports Kavanaugh confirmation," October 4, 2018
  88. ↑ Twitter, "@MikeScarcella," October 3, 2018
  89. ↑ Washington Post, "In 2: 30 a.m. tweets, White House says FBI report supports Kavanaugh confirmation," October 4, 2018
  90. ↑ Senate Judiciary Committee, "Swetnick, Avenatti Referred for Criminal Investigation," October 25, 2018
  91. ↑ The New York Times, "On Language' Potus and Flotus," October 12, 1997
  92. ↑ 92.0 92.1 SupremeCourt.gov, "A Brief Overview of the Supreme Court," accessed April 20, 2015

Political offices
Preceded by
Anthony Kennedy 		Supreme Court of the United States
2018-Present		 Succeeded by
-
Preceded by
Laurence Silberman 		United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
2006-2018		 Succeeded by
-



Washington, D.C.Washington, D.C. judicial newsJudicial selection in Washington, D.C.United States District Court for the District of ColumbiaUnited States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia CircuitDistrict of Columbia Court of AppealsSuperior Court of the District of ColumbiaDCTemplate.jpg
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Brett_Kavanaugh&oldid=10680585"