"A team player on the Team of Nine."

Given the drama and anguish of the last months in the Church and the country, the average American and certainly the average Catholic might be forgiven for having possibly forgotten about the impending confirmation hearings for the 53-year old Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. After all, there are the upcoming mid-term elections, the on-going investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and, of course, the catastrophic scandal surrounding Theodore McCarrick, the horrifying Pennsylvania Grand Jury report, and the letter of Archbishop Carlo Viganò accusing Pope Francis of complicity in covering up McCarrick’s sexual misconduct and abuse of power.

Any thoughts, however, of overlooking the hearings on Judge Brett Kavanaugh were swiftly disabused by the theatrics, shouting, histrionics and apocalyptic tone all within the very first hour of the confirmation hearing that began on Tuesday morning. More than seventy angry and shouting protesters were arrested and removed from the committee room, and all of the Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee made repeated efforts to postpone the hearing by lodging unsuccessful procedural motions and interrupting their Republican colleagues.

While the anger and raucous atmospherics eased in the hours that followed, the tone and direction of the hearing had been made clear. They point to an ugly week of questioning and bitter division that reflect the equally divided situation in the country and the understandable political posturing of Democrats trying to rally their base two months out from an election.

President Donald Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on July 9, to be his Supreme Court nominee to replace the retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy. From the moment Kennedy announced his retirement in July, both sides of the political aisle in the U.S. Senate and the country set to work to bolster or derail the nominee. As it is, the Democrats have a tough task to stop the process.

Equally, The Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee face the potentially insuperable obstacle in the mathematics of opposing the nomination. Without a defection from the GOP caucus in the Senate, the Democrats simply do not have the votes to stop let alone defeat the expected up and down vote on Kavanaugh that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) wants by the end of the month so that Kavanagh is in place before the start of the high court’s new term in October.

What, then, is left to the Left?

The strategy of the Democrat minority in the Senate and on the committee is essentially the same that they tried against Neil Gorsuch only with greater vehemence, vitriol and perhaps significantly more ammunition.

Since July, the writings, speeches, opinions – both legal and personal – and background of the nominee have been subject to intense scrutiny. This is true for every nominee in the modern era and above all a nominee presented by a Republican president. Nominees typically are targeted ruthlessly by special interest groups, as Judge Robert Bork discovered in 1987 when his infamous nomination process ended with his defeat in the Senate. Since then, his name has been a verb to describe the treatment of would-be Supreme Court Justices. In other words, Kavanaugh is likely this week to be “Borked.”

The Democrats on the committee and their leadership in the Senate have already been trying this strategy. It failed conspicuously with Gorsuch, but Kavanaugh has one of the most expansive paper trails of any recent Supreme Court nominee. He served for more than a decade on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, five years as a lawyer in the White House Counsel's office in the George W. Bush administration and was a member of the legal team of Special Counsel Ken Starr that led to the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in 1998-1999. Democrats on the hearing’s first day were especially vocal in complaining that 100,000 pages of Kavanaugh’s background had been placed under Executive Privilege and that another 42,000 pages from his time in the Bush Administration had been handed over only the night before.

Having failed – as they knew they would – to stop the proceedings with procedural maneuvers, Democrat members on the committee embraced the Bork stratagem with great enthusiasm. One by one, they minority members of the Senate Judiciary Committee spoke in apocalyptic terms about the nominee. They focused especially on his presumed threat to Roe v. Wade, minority rights, financial regulation and especially whether he would be an independent voice against the ambitions of the Executive Branch and its Chief Executive, Donald Trump, whom they openly despise.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) already under intense pressure by the increasingly enraged progressive movement declared, “The impact of overturning Roe is much broader than a woman’s right to choose, it’s about protecting from governmental intrusion, who to marry, where to send children to school, medical care at end of life and whether or when to have a family.”

She was joined in similar rhetoric by the other Democrat members of the committee, in particular the liberal Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Kamala Harris (D-CA) who are expected to run for the Democrat nomination for president in 2020 and therefore are positioning themselves with the party’s left-leaning base. Booker has already declared that he will vote no and has called blocking Kavanaugh a “moral moment,” adding that “you are either complicit in the evil, you are either contributing to the wrong, or you are fighting against it.” In his opening statement, Booker called Kavanaugh a tool for special interests. "It seems to so clear that in your courts,” he intoned, “the same folks seem to win over and over again: the powerful, the privileged, big corporations, special interests. Over and over again, the folks who lose are the folks who I came to Washington to fight for: working folks, consumers, women, immigrants, minorities, the disadvantaged, the poor.”

Harris continued to question the absence of documents and Kavanaugh’s adherence to “deeply conservative partisan agendas.” She declared that she was concerned whether he would “treat every American equally or instead show allegiance to the political party and conservative agenda” and that his “loyalty would be to the president who appointed” him and not to the U.S. Constitution.

For the Republicans, the parliamentary and numeric advantage is dependent on their ability to hold the Senate’s GOP caucus against any pressure on some of their members to defect. So far, they have reason to be confident. The Republican members of the committee spoke as would be expected in support of Judge Kavanaugh, but they are adopting a mostly low key defensive posture.

When at last Kavanaugh’s moment came on day one, he was introduced by former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who praised his record and his mind. "His intellect,” she said, “is unquestioned. His judgement is highly regarded. And I can personally attest to his character and integrity as a colleague.”

His opening statement was not filled with soaring imagery but, as throughout the nomination process, he ticked off all of the right boxes. He complimented his mentor and friend, Justice Kennedy, for whom he clerked. He described Kennedy as “a model of civility and collegiality. He fiercely defended the independence of the Judiciary. And he was a champion of liberty.”

Kavanaugh then said, “A good judge must be an umpire—a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no litigant or policy…I don’t decide cases based on personal or policy preferences. I am not a pro-plaintiff or pro-defendant judge. I am not a pro-prosecution or pro-defense judge. I am a pro-law judge.” He also noted, “If confirmed to the Court, I would be part of a Team of Nine, committed to deciding cases according to the Constitution and laws of the United States. I would always strive to be a team player on the Team of Nine.”

As with the future Justice Neil Gorsuch, Kavanaugh now must face absolutely withering attacks on his character, record, temperament, allegiances, faith and principles. The interrogation will be conducted by Democrat members determined to portray him as a radical threat to the country. As with all nominations, everything will depend on how Kavanaugh responds to the frontal assaults as well as the inevitable surprises and “gotcha” moments. With his long record of government and judicial service, he will face tough questions.

Ultimately, Kavanaugh’s seat on the High Court is in his own hands. The GOP members seemed content with Judge Kavanaugh’s opening statement, cautiously worded as it was. The Republicans know quite well that they can only run interference for him so far. It will be a nasty week but at the end of it, the Judge will be on his way to becoming a Justice or Donald Trump will have to find himself a new nominee. </s> U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said Thursday morning that the committee has received the supplemental background check on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh as senators get their first look at the document.

In a series of Twitter posts, Grassley said U.S. senators will be able to view the report in a secure area, in agreement with Democrat ranking member Dianne Feinstein. The FBI supplemental report started after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony last week on alleged sexual assault charges against Kavanaugh.

The results of the supplemental background check will not be open to the public. Kavanaugh’s rise to Supreme Court hangs in the balance as the current federal appeals court judge has fought to save his nomination after sexual misconduct charges from Ford and several other women.

According to CNN, Senate Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell started paving the way for a procedural vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination on Friday, leading to a possible final vote on the nomination Saturday.

CNN wrote that the background check examined in more detail Ford’s accusations against Kavanaugh, the judge’s denial, and other questions about the judge’s character. The report gives some background on Kavanaugh’s candor and truthfulness in fighting the allegations, the network stated.

Kavanaugh’s former Yale roommate James Roche told CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 that the judge lied about his past drinking during last week’s hearing.

“We were in a room together — our beds were 10 feet apart for a couple of months,” Roche said on the news show. “And what struck me and made me more interested in speaking out about it is not only did I know that he wasn’t telling, you know, the truth, I knew that he knew that he wasn’t telling the truth.”

With a slim two-seat majority, the public will be watching particularly the reaction of three Republican senators who could hold the swing votes to confirm or deny Kavanaugh’s seat on the Supreme Court.

Arizona’s Jeff Flake, who set the supplemental background check in motion last week by calling for it in exchange for his vote to move Kavanaugh’s nomination out of the Judiciary Committee, is one of the key Senate members.

The others include moderates Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska. All three blasted President Donald Trump this week for comments he made during a rally in Mississippi where he appeared to mock Ford’s testimony.

“There’s no time and no place for remarks like that,” Flake said on NBC’s Today show Wednesday when asked about Trump’s comments. “To discuss something this sensitive at a political rally is just not right, it’s just not right. I wish he hadn’t done it. It’s kind of appalling.” </s> WASHINGTON — Republican leaders scheduled a Friday vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, following a day-long hearing in which senators heard testimony from a woman who alleges he sexually assaulted her when they were teens.

However, it was unclear whether Republicans had the votes to confirm the nominee after an emotional hearing where Christine Blasey Ford detailed her allegations that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothes at a party when they were both teens.

Ford told the Senate Judiciary Commitee she was "100 percent" confident Kavanaugh was the person who held her down and tried to remove her clothes at a party when they were both teens in 1982. Kavanaugh vehemently denied the allegations.

Friday's vote in the Senate Judiciary Committee was scheduled for 9:30 a.m.

Confirmation by Kavanaugh would be an important milestone for Republicans and the president as it would tilt the balance of power on the high court to conservatives.

But Democrats have pointed to the array of accusations and lack of an FBI investigation as a reason to slow down the hearing, potentially allowing more accusations to surface.

President Donald Trump voiced his support for a Friday vote on Twitter, saying Kavanaugh's testimony was "powerful, honest, and riveting."

"Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him," the president said. "Democrats’ search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and effort to delay, obstruct, and resist. The Senate must vote!"

In testimony that was both fiery and at times tearful, Kavanaugh said the sexual assault allegations had harmed his family and his name. He professed his innocence and accused Democrats of "character assassination." Kavanaugh also pledged to fight for this nomination, saying: "you'll never get me to quit." </s> The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee has opened confirmation hearings on Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court.

The panel’s chairman, Republican Chuck Grassley, opened the first day of hearings with statements about what the judges role should be in interpreting the laws of our country:

Grassley emphasized that judges should not rewrite the laws of the people:

Gorsuch’s nomination has been cheered by Republicans and praised by some left-leaning legal scholars.

Democrats headed into the committee hearings divided over how hard to fight him.

Questioning of Judge Gorsuch will begin on Tuesday. </s> The Senate Judiciary Committee is reviewing allegations by a third woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, a panel spokesman said Wednesday, in yet another potential blow to his prospects for Senate confirmation.

WASHINGTON — The Senate Judiciary Committee is reviewing allegations by a third woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, a panel spokesman said Wednesday, in yet another potential blow to his prospects for Senate confirmation.

As in the allegations by his two previous accusers, the latest incidents are alleged to have occurred decades ago. In a three-page sworn declaration, Julie Swetnick of Washington, D.C., says she witnessed Kavanaugh “consistently engage in excessive drinking and inappropriate contact of a sexual nature with women in the early 1980s.” Her attorney, Michael Avenatti, posted the declaration on Twitter and provided it to the committee.

Kavanaugh denied her allegations as he has the others. President Donald Trump tweeted that Avenatti was a “third-rate lawyer” pushing “false accusations.” He has described the previous allegations as a Democratic “con job.”

The new development came a day before Trump’s nominee and his first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, are to testify to the Judiciary Committee in what looms as a critical moment in the 53-year-old conservative jurist’s quest to join the high court. As of now, Republicans controlling that panel have announced no plans to focus Thursday’s session on the claims of the two other women.

In fact, the committee is expecting to push ahead on a vote recommending confirmation with a roll call by the full Senate early next week.

“This is ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone. I don’t know who this is and this never happened,” he said.

The committee also released a two-page prepared statement from Kavanaugh for Thursday’s hearing in which he “categorically and unequivocally” denies Ford’s allegation. She has said he forced her into a room at a high school party, held her on a bed and tried removing her clothes as he muffled her mouth with his hands. Ford says she eventually escaped.

Kavanaugh’s written testimony for the committee went a bit further than the description of his youthful behavior he gave in a Fox News Channel interview Monday, when he said “people” may have drunk too much at high school parties.

“I drank beer with my friends, usually on weekends. Sometimes I had too many. In retrospect, I said and did things in high school that make me cringe now,” Kavanaugh said.

He also provided the committee with detailed calendar pages listing in green-and-white squares the activities that filled his summer of 1982 when he was 17 years old — exams, movies, sports and plenty of parties.

That’s the year when Ford says she believes the assault occurred.

The May through August pages mention several parties at various houses and also a beach week, highlighted in all caps, the week after Kavanaugh’s exams. Nothing on the calendar appears to mention Ford, who has said she was a “friendly acquaintance” of Kavanaugh’s at the time.

Swetnick, the third accuser, made other accusations in her statement. The Associated Press has not been able to corroborate them, and continues to investigate.

In an interview with the AP, Avenatti said he would not provide additional details about Swetnick’s allegations, saying they want to see an FBI investigation. He said they expect to release additional names and evidence in “coming weeks.”

Avenatti also represents Stormy Daniels, who alleges she was paid to keep a sexual relationship with Trump quiet. The publicity-friendly attorney has said he’s considering competing for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination.

The Judiciary Committee has scheduled a vote on Kavanaugh for Friday, just a day after the hearing, though it has said it might be delayed. But Senate leaders have laid plans for lawmakers to stay in session this weekend to take procedural votes that would lead to a final confirmation vote early next week.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a Trump ally, warned Republicans not to “bail out” on Kavanaugh.

“Just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, it just did,” he said in a written statement. “The lawyer to porn stars has just taken this debacle to an even lower level.”

No. 2 Senate GOP leader John Cornyn said the Judiciary panel had asked for interviews and information on new accusations, but he didn’t indicate the hearing or planned votes would be delayed.

“The longer this nomination sits out there the more you’re going to get reckless allegations that have no basis in fact,” he said.

On the other side, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Kavanaugh should withdraw his nomination.

Hanging in the balance is Trump’s chance to swing the high court more firmly to the right for a generation. Despite Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s forecast that Republicans will win, Kavanaugh’s fate remains uncertain in a chamber where Republicans have a scant 51-49 majority.

Earlier Wednesday, Ford’s lawyers said they’d given the Judiciary committee sworn statements from four people who say Ford told them well before Trump nominated Kavanaugh to the court this summer that she had been sexually assaulted when she was much younger. According to all four, she either named Kavanaugh as the assailant or described the attacker as a “federal judge.”

Those documents could have weight because people who Ford has said were at the party she’s described have not corroborated her account.

In one statement, family friend Keith Koegler said he wrote to Ford in a June 29 email, “I remember you telling me about him, but I don’t remember his name. Do you mind telling me so I can read about him?”

“Brett Kavanaugh,” Ford responded by email, according to Koegler, her son’s baseball team coach.

Ford’s husband, Russell Ford, stated that he became aware around the time the couple wed in 2002 that his wife had “any experience with sexual assault,” but she provided no details at the time. In 2012 during a couples therapy session, he says, she revealed that in high school she had been “trapped in a room and physically restrained by one boy who was molesting her while another boy watched.” He says she named the attacker as Kavanaugh.

The subject came up again when Trump was considering his first Supreme Court nominee, who ended up being Justice Neil Gorsuch. Before the selection, Ford had told her husband that she was afraid the president might nominate Kavanaugh. The matter came up again when Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement and Trump had a second seat to fill.

Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell will be brought in to handle questioning of Kavanaugh and Ford. Mitchell comes from the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in Phoenix, where she is the chief of the Special Victims Division, which covers sex crimes and family violence. </s> WASHINGTON — Senate Republican leaders have agreed to delay a final vote on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh to allow time for an investigation by the FBI of the sexual misconduct allegations against him.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican, said, "There's going to be a supplemental background investigation," which would delay a vote "no later than one week."

About two hours earlier, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted along party lines to move Kavanaugh's nomination to the Senate floor.

Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., who had been undecided, agreed to advance Kavanaugh's nomination but indicated he might oppose him if the White House doesn't agree to seek such a probe, which Democrats have demanded.

“This country’s being ripped apart here,” an emotional Flake said after a flurry of back-room negotiations outside the committee room. “We can have a short pause and make sure that the FBI can investigate.”

Only the White House can force the FBI to undertake such a probe. But if Flake and other Republicans demand it, President Donald Trump may have no choice.

Senate Judiciary Committee member Senator Jeff Flake (R-AZ) walks out of the room during a markup hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC on September 28, 2018, on the nomination of Brett M. Kavanaugh to be a Supreme Court justice.

"Someone's got to explain this to Trump," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said after the committee vote.

The president told reporters he's open to a delay and that senators should do “whatever they think is necessary" to reach a final vote on Kavanaugh.

Earlier, the Republican-controlled panel turned aside Democrats' effort to subpoena Mark Judge, a potential witness to the alleged assault of Christine Blasey Ford, who gave wrenching testimony Thursday about being attacked by Kavanaugh when she was 15.

After Friday's vote, a lawyer for Mark Judge said Judge "will answer any and all questions posed to him" if requested by any law enforcement agency.

The committee's action came less than a day after it heard from Kavanaugh and Ford, who alleges the nominee pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothes at a party in 1982, when the federal appeals court judge was 17. Kavanaugh, now 53, vehemently denied the allegations.

“We should not rush to judgment,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the panel. She said it was wrong to listen to "a credible, poised and brave witness and simply ignore what we heard.”

But Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said Democrats simply want to "beat Judge Kavanaugh into submission."

“We can’t allow more time for new smears to damage Judge Kavanaugh," he said. "We've reached a point where it's time to end the circus.”

The nomination now goes to the full Senate, where a final up-or-down vote had been anticipated by Tuesday. Now that vote could be delayed for up to a week.

Republicans left the U.S. Capitol on Thursday evening in a state of uncertainty. GOP Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, both supporters of abortion rights, have remained noncommittal. Murkowski told reporters Friday she would support Flake's proposal to push the vote back one week. Democratic Sens. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota also have not declared how they will vote but are more likely to oppose Kavanaugh.

Very few others remained undecided Friday. Sen. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., one of three Democrats who supported Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch's confirmation last year, announced he would oppose Kavanaugh.

"The allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh are disturbing and credible," he said. "In the interest of getting as much information as possible, I believe the allegations should be investigated by the FBI."

Democrats were furious that Republicans scheduled the vote so soon after the day-long hearing, at which both Ford and Kavanaugh said they were "100 percent" sure of their diametrically opposed stories. Senators pointed to people who were allegedly present at the party Ford has described, saying they have not had the chance to be subpoenaed and interviewed.

"We have done a botch of an investigation," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said. "Over time, I expect the facts to come out. They have a way of doing that. Cover-ups never last. The sand is running through Kavanaugh's hourglass."

The president of the American Bar Association, Robert Carlson, and Heather Gerken, dean of Yale Law School, from which Kavanaugh graduated, added their voices Friday to those seeking an FBI investigation of the sexual assault allegations. But the White House has not requested one, and neither has Kavanaugh.

“Why didn’t he do it?" an emotional Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said Friday. "Because they’re afraid of what they’ll find out.”

Ford offered emotional and intimate testimony before the Judiciary Committee. She told senators she was confident Kavanaugh was "the boy who sexually assaulted me." She said the sounds of his laughter during the assault have haunted her for decades.

"They were having fun at my expense," she said. "I was underneath one of them while the two laughed."

In testimony that was both fiery and at times tearful, Kavanaugh said the sexual assault allegations had harmed his family and his name. He accused Democrats of orchestrating a "political hit" and repeatedly professed his innocence.

"You will not drive me out," he said.

Democrats denounced the judge's temperament Friday, noting he blamed his predicament on Trump's election and revenge on behalf of the Clintons, presumably for his work investigating President Bill Clinton in the 1990s.

“It’s hard to make this stuff up," Sen Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said. "That amounts to conspiratorial madness.”

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., characterized the situation as "not a partisan moment. This is a moral moment in our nation.”

Confirming Kavanaugh would be an important milestone for Republicans and the president, as it would tilt the balance of power on the high court to conservatives. </s> Supreme Court Justice nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s daughters were rushed out of his heated nomination hearing on Tuesday amid raucous Democrat-backed protests.

Senate Democrats and leftist protesters repeatedly disrupted Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing on Tuesday. Democrats tried to delay the hearing, believing that they did not have enough time to review documents relating to Kavanaugh, while protesters cried about how his rulings on the Supreme Court might impact abortion rights, women’s rights, etc.

As protesters increasingly shouted and heckled the hearing Tuesday, Kavanaugh’s wife, Ashley, took her two daughters out, as it got too “hot.” Margaret is 13, while Kavanaugh’s other daughter, Elizabeth, is ten-years-old.

“It was very unpleasant for young children,” one insider said.

One leftist protestor screamed, “This is a mockery. This is a travesty of justice. Cancel Brett Kavanaugh, adjourn the hearing.”

Protesters during the hearing shouted that President Donald Trump is “an illegitimate president who cannot make an appointment to Supreme Court” and this “should be an impeachment hearing.”

One leftist protester even interrupted and subsequently upset Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) during the nomination hearing. The leftist protestor complained that women are going to be sent for “back-alley abortions” should he become a Supreme Court justice.

“Mr. Chairman, I do intend at any point to continue what I have to say with such interruptions,” Leahy fired back. “I don’t care who’s side they’re on.”

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) admitted Tuesday during the Senate hearing that he and other Democrats coordinated in a conference call to disrupt the hearings. NBC News reported that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) organized the call over the weekend to discuss how to disrupt the Supreme Court nomination hearing.

Mr. Chairman, there was a phone conference yesterday, and I can tell you, at the time of the phone conference, many issues were raised. One of the issues was the fact that over 100,000 documents related to Judge Kavanaugh had been characterized by the chairman of the committee as committee confidential.

Durbin then proceeded to defend the protests during the hearing as the “noise of democracy” after he admitted that he and other Democrats had coordinated disruptions to the hearing.

It’s different in what’s happened in this room, just this morning. What we’ve heard is the noise of democracy. This is what happens in a free country, when people can stand up and speak, and not be jailed, imprisoned, tortured, or killed because of it. It is not mob rule. There have been times when it is uncomfortable — I’m sure it was for your children, I hope you can explain this to them at some point — but it does represent what we are about in this democracy.

The anti-Trump and Democrat-aligned Women’s March group also claimed credit for the disruptions.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-TX) said Senate Democrats would be “held in contempt” if Kavanaugh’s hearing were a courtroom.

“I haven’t been in as many confirmation hearings as my colleagues, but this is the first confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court justice that I’ve seen, basically, according to mob rule,” the Texas Republican added.

“We have rules in the Senate. We have norms for decorum,” Cornyn said. </s> A day after a bruising day-long hearing with testimony from Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, Judiciary Committee votes on advancing Kavanaugh’s nomination to the full Senate </s> At a suburban high school party in 1982, a man trapped a woman in a room, pinned her to a bed and began drunkenly groping her as he attempted to remove her clothes. He put his hand over her mouth when she tried to scream as his drunk friend watched and egged him on.

This, by no means, is a unique account — but it’s a very important one. The accuser, California university professor Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, publicly came forward about these allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh days before a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting was set to vote on his nomination. On Tuesday, Sept. 18, the committee officially canceled it’s Sept. 20 meeting, delaying its vote.

The committee called for a hearing to examine the matter, and Ford — who agreed to testify in a public hearing on Thursday — will inevitably have to stand trial and relive her trauma amid doubts, threats and mockery.

To further stress matters, Deborah Ramirez, 53, came forward in The New Yorker accusing Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct when they were both attending Yale University. According to Ramirez’s account of that night during the 1983-84 school year, Kavanaugh exposed himself at a party and thrusted his penis in her face, touching her with it as she pushed him away.

In light of this recent accusation, Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California called for an “immediate postponement” of any action regarding Kavanaugh’s nomination and for the FBI to investigate both women’s allegations.

This mounting case is significant for several reasons, most of which is that it will signal just how seriously the U.S. Senate and Supreme Court treats allegations of sexual misconduct, especially amongst its own members and nominees. If the Senate Judiciary Committee fails to handle this matter with sensitivity, accuracy and deliberation, we may see a shameful repeat of American history.

In 1991, Anita Hill accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment. Hill delivered her testimony before an all white, male Senate Judiciary Committee — a panel that truly didn’t grasp, or care to understand, the seriousness of sexual assaults and the poor character of those who commit them. After a lengthy debate, the U.S. Senate confirmed Thomas to the Supreme Court by a vote of 52-48.

In an opinion piece for the New York Times, Hill, an attorney and professor at Brandeis University, noted the parallels between Thomas’s 1991 confirmation hearing and Kavanaugh’s present hearing, and detailed how the current committee can get this one right.

“To do better, the 2018 Senate Judiciary Committee must demonstrate a clear understanding that sexual violence is a social reality to which elected representatives must respond,” Hill said in her op-ed. “A fair, neutral and well-thought-out course is the only way to approach Dr. Blasey and Judge Kavanaugh’s forthcoming testimony.”

Taking Hill’s guidelines into account, the committee can achieve justice where it had failed 27 years ago. But we’re going to need more than that if we, as a nation, want to take sexual assault allegations seriously and prevent them in the first place. We need to address how men, especially those in power, treat women at home, on the street and in the workplace.

While the #MeToo movement has furthered progress on this issue and begun to shape the cultural lens, there’s still men out there who continue to perpetuate a culture of sexual abuse and harassment. The daily microaggressions perpetrated by men against women — the catcalls, the unwanted touches, the eerie wanton glances — all add up to the insurmountable dread a woman feels any time she’s alone with a strange man. But the perpetrator of more serious sexual misconduct is seldom a stranger.

According to the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, seven out of 10 rapes are committed by someone the victim knows, and 45 percent of those known perpetrators are acquaintances, such as classmates, coworkers and bosses.

Not only are Ford’s, Ramirez’s and Hill’s allegations against these men believable, they’re all too common. When men, especially those in positions of power, are accused of sexual assault, they use all their influences to discredit their accusers. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board sought to refute Ford’s claim in an op-ed by implying that the timing of her allegation (days before Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing) signifies a “calculated political ambush.” By questioning Ford’s motives, they shifted blame and doubt from Kavanaugh to her in an attempt to invalidate everything she says.

When men work to discredit or make light of women’s serious sexual misconduct allegations — like when Donald Trump Jr. mocked Ford’s claims of attempted rape on his Instagram — it hurts the survivor while also damaging the credibility of women everywhere and their right to live without fear of sexual harassment.

Ultimately, we need men to be allies — to call out your friends when they make a sexist joke, to intervene when you see someone being verbally or physically harassed, and to treat allegations of sexual assault seriously and with care. I hope the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee take at least this last appeal to heart, not just for Ford and Ramirez, but for women everywhere.
The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee opens confirmation hearings for U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.