Sen. Cruz Questions Panel of Witnesses on Fourth Day of Confirmation Hearings for Judge Kavanaugh

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today questioned a panel of witnesses on the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to be an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. There, he questioned witnesses on the qualifications of Judge Kavanaugh to serve as a justice on the Supreme Court, and their direct experiences with him.

Sen. Cruz’s full line of questioning may be viewed here. Full transcript is below: 

Sen. Cruz: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to each of the witnesses who are here.

Professor Amar, let’s start with you. You are widely acknowledged to be one of the most respected constitutional law professors in the country. In your opinion, is Judge Kavanaugh qualified to serve as a Supreme Court justice?

Professor Amar: Unquestionably.

Sen. Cruz: How would you compare his level of qualifications to other Supreme Court nominees, without specifically disparaging any other nominee?

Professor Amar: I have great respect for all the justices. But, if--I would actually say without naming names that, you know, I might rank him, I might predict that at the end, were he to be confirmed by this body, at the end of his service that he would rank well above the average. I would say in the top tier of modern justices. And the modern justices are quite impressive.

Sen. Cruz: Miss Sinzdak, you were a student of Judge Kavanaugh’s. What was he like as a professor?

Colleen Sinzdak: Well, again he was open-minded, principled. He was very fair. I mean he was also a really nice guy. I take the point of my colleagues that likeability isn’t necessarily a criteria, so I didn’t gear my comments in that direction. But, he was wonderfully warm, he took students out to dinner, and was very friendly. 

Sen. Cruz: Am I right that you were part of the legal team that brought a challenge to President Trump’s so-called ‘travel ban,’ is that right? 

Colleen Sinzdak: That’s correct.

Sen. Cruz: And, in your experience at Harvard with Judge Kavanaugh as a professor, you found him fair, open-minded, willing to listen to views from both perspectives?

Colleen Sinzdak: I did. I’d like to hope that I used a lot of the things I learned in Judge Kavanaugh’s class to bring that challenge against what I still consider an unconstitutional order.

Sen. Cruz: Mr. Olson, you served with Judge Kavanaugh in the George W. Bush Administration. You were Solicitor General while he was in the White House. What was your experience in terms of any professional interactions you had with him at that time?

Former Solicitor General Theodore Olson: We did not have a great deal of professional interactions because his position in the White House did not directly relate to what the Solicitor General was doing. We worked often with the Counsel to the president, the White House Counsel. But from time to time there were opportunities to see the kind of input that he was providing to the people in the White House, the senior officials in the White House, including the President. He was scrupulous, as far as I could tell, scrupulously balanced in making sure that the President and other senior officials in the department were receiving even handed presentations so that he would assure that with one side was being advanced to the President that the other side was also being demonstrated. His thoughtfulness impressed, I think, everyone around him that was dealing with him, both from the standpoint of the White House and the Justice Department.

Sen. Cruz: Now you’ve argued in courts of appeals all over the country. Have you had the opportunity to present oral argument before Judge Kavanaugh on the D.C. Circuit?

Former Solicitor General Theodore Olson: I have. I presented argument in one of the cases involving separation of powers, the constitutionality of the Consumer Finance Protection Board. And we heard that case en banc in the D.C. Circuit. All of the judges were engaged in that case. It was the kind of case that the D.C. Circuit is very good at because it involves separation of powers. It involves the structure of government. All of the judges on that case were engaged. The argument must’ve gone on for a couple of hours. Judge Kavanaugh was as engaged, if not more so than the other judges. At the end of the day, he did not agree completely with the arguments that we were making. But he wrote a very thoughtful, reasoned opinion. Concurring opinion with respect to--concurring and dissenting opinion with respect to the constitutionality of the Consumer Finance Protection Board. He very carefully parsed what the Supreme Court had said in the Free Enterprise Fund case, and came to a conclusion that was, I thought, very persuasive. Although, I didn’t completely agree with it. It was very persuasive and reasonable.

Sen. Cruz: Let me thank each of the witnesses for being here on this panel. And, I want to echo what Senator Feinstein said in particular Miss Weintraub. Thank you for your powerful and inspirational testimony. Thank you for being here, and for being part of this panel.

###