He seems to be the best of the options on the table. Another good choice by Donald Trump.
And, yes, far better than Hillary’s choice would have been. No question about it.
UPDATE: Ed Whelan has the lowdown on Kavanaugh at his indispensable Bench Memos. Quotable:
Kavanaugh is a strong critic of the Chevron principle of deference to administrative agencies — both of the foundation of that principle and of the manner in which it is often exercised. He has earned acclaim for “cabining” the Chevron doctrine by helping to develop an exception to it for “major questions” of policy.
Just like Gorsuch. I love it. In this way, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are actually an improvement on Scalia.
Kavanaugh argued (in dissent) that the District of Columbia’s ban on possession of most semi-automatic weapons and its registration requirement for all guns violated the Second Amendment.
. . . .
Kavanaugh argued (in Priests for Life v. HHS, again in dissent) that the HHS contraceptive mandate violated the religious-liberty rights of objecting religious organizations. He also rejected an Establishment Clause challenge to the prayers at the presidential inauguration and to the inclusion of “so help me God” in the official presidential oath.
. . . . On campaign-finance restrictions, a liberal academic who broadly supports such restrictions bemoans that “the only question is whether [Kavanaugh would] be more like Justice Scalia (voting to strike down more and more campaign limits) or like Justice Thomas (voting to do that AND strike down campaign finance disclosure laws).”
This is all good. And an improvement over the unreliable windbag Kennedy.
[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]