Richard Blumenthal (D - CT) Definitely No



Contact Senator Blumenthal
☎️ 202-224-2823
Tweet to @SenBlumenthal

7 Statements
(Statements last updated October 6, 2018 04:02 PM -04:00.)

October 4: One of my constituents went to the FBI with evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was in touch with the wife of an alleged eye witness regarding Ms. Ramirez’s allegations of sexual misconduct before the New Yorker story broke. The FBI never called her back. Judge Kavanaugh told the Judiciary Committee under oath he never discussed Ms. Ramirez's allegations before the New Yorker article—now we know, from confirmed public reports, he asked friends to vouch for him before it was ever published. Any lawyer knows coordinating eyewitness accounts could constitute witness tampering. We don't know what Judge Kavanaugh said in the days before the New Yorker story broke, but it sure seems like something the FBI should've investigated, & may explain misleading testimony. (Twitter)

September 20: Senate Republicans are attempting to make Dr. Blasey Ford testify on just a few days’ notice—without having the FBI follow up on her allegations and provide a report first. This strikes us as simply a check-the-box exercise in a rush to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. It is for this reason that we urge you to reconsider your decision and ask the FBI to take appropriate action in response to the claims that have been made, so that Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination can be considered by the Senate in a manner that is both consistent with past practices and fair to the parties involved and the American people. (

August 24: Given the possibility of criminal wrongdoing by the President, doubts that Judge Kavanaugh believes a president can even be investigated, and the unprecedented lack of transparency regarding this nominee's record, we should not move forward with hearings on September 4th. Instead, we should have a special meeting of the Committee to discuss a bipartisan, fair, and transparent process for moving forward. (Twitter)

August 8: “This extraordinary step is a last resort— unprecedented and unfortunate but necessary to fully and fairly review Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. I regret that Chairman Grassley has left us with no other choice. We need these documents to do our job. They reflect and reveal a critical period in Judge Kavanaugh’s professional background that we have a constitutional duty to assess. Chairman Grassley‘s actions bar access to information that is our obligation and right to review,” Blumenthal said. “Never before has the minority party been forced to use the Freedom of Information Act to access vital information about a Supreme Court nominee. But there is too much at stake to accept anything less than a complete picture of Judge Kavanaugh’s background.” (

July 26: When it comes to addressing presidential accountability, Kavanaugh has given clear signals about his beliefs. Some observers might find it reassuring to think that Kavanaugh would not rule as his writings suggest. That would be a mistake. It would be far wiser to listen to the message that he has sent for decades — and to do so before it’s too late. (The Washington Post)

July 13: "Brett Kananaugh is in favor of uncheck presidential power, no president should have to go before a grand jury or be interviewed by the FBI. He thinks the president should be able to not enforce any laws for any reason," said Blumenthal . (News 8 WTNH)

July 9: I'm voting no. (Twitter)


Back to main page