What Trump's Court Pick Means for Liberty

Hearings begin today for President Trump's Supreme Court pick, Brett Kavanaugh.

---------
---------

John Stossel wonders whether Kavanaugh will be good for liberty.

Libertarians are right to worry. Kavanaugh has shown deference to government when it spies on people.

In one case, Kavanaugh allowed the government's "metadata collection program", in which the government stored phone data on millions of Americans.

Kavanaugh even went out of his way give comments on that case, saying the metadata program "serves a critically important special need—preventing terrorist attacks on the United States."

But a government report later found that: "we are aware of no instance in which the program directly contributed to ... disruption of a terrorist attack."

Yes, says Ilya Shaprio, the CATO Institute's senior fellow in constitutional studies, Kavanaugh disagrees with libertarians on national security. But on just about every other issue, Kavanaugh would likely advance liberty.

Shapiro notes that Kavanaugh is one of the best judges in the country at opposing government regulation on individuals and companies. As a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Kavanaugh tried to strike down lots of regulations: net neutrality, EPA admissions rules, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. He didn’t always succeed, but he argued that they were all bureaucratic overreaches.

Shapiro tells Stossel that Kavanaugh would also likely overturn the "Kelo" eminent domain decision, which allowed governments to take private property for nearly any reason.

Kavanaugh is also good on gun rights. Citing the 2nd Amendment, he tried to overturn a DC ban on all semi-automatic rifles.

The left fears Kavanaugh mostly for other reasons. Protestors shout "hell no, Kavanaugh" at rallies. Senator Kristen Gillibrand warns: "What’s at stake is freedom for LGBTQ Americans, for equal rights, for civil rights."

Senator Bernie Sanders warns he would "tell women they don’t have the constitutional right to control their own bodies."

But their biggest fears are misplaced, Shaprio tells Stossel. Kavanaugh is unlikely to change rulings on Roe v. Wade and gay marriage, because he and Chief Justice John Roberts respect precedent, especially if changing it would disrupt people's lives.

The left can breathe easier on those things, says Shapiro, but he notes that Kavanaugh will likely overturn one thing that is dear to the left: affirmative action.

"Kavanaugh could provide the 5th vote to overturn that 40-year-old experiment with using racial preferences to promote some kind of nebulous diversity."

Should libertarians be happy with Kavanaugh overall, Stossel asks?

“Definitely," Shapiro says. "He’s not going to agree with us all the time, certainly. But no judges or justices do."

[thpstmstr]

Stossel, I know you probably don't read these comments but I just wanted you to know I grew up watching you, saw you on Crowder, really enjoyed the interview and thought his praise was excessive but spot on. It's exactly how I would have handled it because I do admire your work. Keep it up and I'll keep telling people about the channel and your charity!

[TickedOffPriest]

If Sanders hates him, he cannot be that bad.

[MrRocky]

I swear if trump said breathing is GREAT the dems would stop

[TheDukeOfTumwater]

I've been binging of Stossel's videos lately, and I can't think of a single internet personality who clearly and concisely articulates libertarian principles as well as he does.

[anthonyburke]

Kennedy has the dignity to retire at his old age. Ginsburg should follow suit...

[nymalous]

I've been watching the back log of these videos, starting with the live-streamed after show from five years ago. Stossel, thank you for helping to keep us all free.

[Thecesarguy]

Wouldnt a conservatives be the most qualifed for being a supreme court juatice by definition? Their only job is to make sure laws do not violate the constitution, not insert their own politics.

[davejacobsen]

Nixon was a big fan of government rules, as was Carter. Since my youth in the fifties I watched the federal government become a very authoritarian state. Under Reagan we began to change but we need justices to support the Constitution and civil rights. Not individuals that just change the law from the bench.

[learnnoobgamer]

Kavanaugh wasn't my pick of the ones President Trump was considering, but he is qualified and he will serve us well. As an originalist his record is fantastic. That is what we need more of in the judiciary... less lawmaking.
Great video as always, Stossel and you got it right. Again.

[BannedPhotoshop]

love John Stossel....cant believe he is 71!!!!1

[zapp]

I just found Stossel a few days ago and am already a fan. Thank you for playing devils advocate and asking hard, unbiased questions to whoever you are interviewing. It's refreshing to see a true journalist and his team at work. I wish we had a real journalist like him in Canada right now that doesn't just push their own agenda.

[b.]

Mike Lee for the SCOTUS! #weWantMoreStossel !!

[dannyturkian]

Me laughing when you say Roe won’t be overturned

[michalnanny]

Actually, Roe vs. Wade WAS repealed! So the leftists were correct to be worried... This one didn't age as well as most.

[zakharmidicheov]

Shouldn't these judges supposed delibrate based on constitution instead of their personal belief? So, this means, even the SC is influenced?

[laughingdaisies]

John! I love you! I just watched your interview on Crowder! I have been a FAN of yours for YEARS!, I have subscribed!! Your son is right...you don’t need mainstream news! YOU are a leader in the NEWS! Telling the truth!

[rikksashquat]

just hope he follows the Constitution as it was written

[þþþþþþþþþ]

So much for that unlikely reversal of abortion rights.

[TheGuy]

“Hey hey ho ho” the common phrase used when there is no substance to the argument.

[scottschipper]

John Stossel. Love all your stories and specials back to 20/20. Best infotainment, infornative and educational.