Definitely No Amy Klobuchar (October 6, 2018): Voted No (The New York Times)

Definitely Yes Cory Gardner (October 6, 2018): Voted Yes (The New York Times)

Definitely Yes John Kennedy (October 6, 2018): Voted Yes (The New York Times)

Definitely Yes Michael B. Enzi (October 6, 2018): Voted Yes (The New York Times)

Definitely Yes Jeff Flake (October 6, 2018): Voted Yes (The New York Times)

Definitely No Lisa Murkowski (October 5, 2018): I believe Brett Kavanaugh’s a good man. It just may be that in my view he’s not the right man for the court at this time. So I have taken my vote here this morning, I’m going to go back to my office and write a floor statement that is more fulsome and have the opportunity to have that. (The New York Times)

Definitely Yes Ben Sasse (October 5, 2018): I'm voting for confirmation because of the evidence and Judge Kavanaugh's qualifications. After spending more than 150 hours doing my homework, I completed my reading of the FBI's seventh background investigation this morning. This broken and politicized process has further undermined public trust. Washington embarrassed itself for the last month, but it is clear that most Americans are yearning for more than tribal blood feuds. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Susan Collins (October 5, 2018): In a speech on the Senate floor, Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins said, “I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh.” (The Washington Post)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (October 5, 2018): Flake also indicated that he plans to vote for Kavanaugh’s confirmation on Saturday “unless something big changes,” which he said he doesn’t expect — a move that further bolsters the judge’s prospects. (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes Joe Manchin III (October 5, 2018): JOE MANCHIN SAYS HE'S A YES on Kavanaugh. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Joni Ernst (October 4, 2018): It is clear that the 7th nonpartisan FBI investigation of Judge Kavanaugh found no new information, no corroboration of any allegations and no indication of misconduct. My support for Judge Kavanaugh remains strong. (Twitter)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (October 4, 2018): 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)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (October 4, 2018): VIDEO: @Sen_JoeManchin approached by protestor who asks “why are you going to vote yes on this [Kavanaugh]?” He replies, “how do you know how I’m gonna vote?” (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Deb Fischer (October 4, 2018): From the beginning, I have supported Judge Kavanaugh because he is eminently qualified to serve on SCOTUS. I reviewed the FBI report and there continues to be no corroboration or evidence that he was involved in any misconduct. I look forward to voting for him later this week. (Twitter)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (October 4, 2018): .@HeidiHeitkamp is my neighbor and friend. She is strong, true to herself, and works hard for her state. Her decision today is the essence of what John McCain was referring to when he said “Nothing in life is more liberating” than standing up for something “larger than yourself.” (Twitter)

Definitely No Heidi Heitkamp (October 4, 2018): I will be voting against confirming U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court ... After doing my due diligence and now that the record is apparently closed, I will vote against his confirmation... I voted for Justice Gorsuch because I felt his legal ability and temperament qualified him to serve on the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh is different. When considering a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, we must evaluate the totality of the circumstances and record before us. In addition to the concerns about his past conduct, last Thursday's hearing called into question Judge Kavanaugh's current temperament, honesty, and impartiality. These are critical traits for any nominee to serve on the highest court in our country. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (October 4, 2018): NEW: Asked by ABC News' @caphilltrish if he is leaning on voting "yes" on Brett Kavanaugh, Sen. Jeff Flake says, "Can't say anything but you can say that I was a 'yes' before this ... thus far, we’ve seen no new, credible corroboration" (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Charles E. Grassley (October 4, 2018): Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley: “Judge Kavanaugh should be confirmed on Saturday" (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Lamar Alexander (October 4, 2018): "Keep in mind, there have been six prior FBI background checks on Judge Kavanaugh over the last 26 years" he said, none of which "turned up a hint of the kind of thing that was alleged" in last week's hearing. (newschannel5.com)

Definitely Yes Jon Kyl (October 4, 2018): Finally, Thursday, Kyl showed up in public, on the floor of the Senate, and explained in a half-hour speech, why he continues to support Kavanaugh's nomination. In doing so, he answered a couple of my questions about his work helping Kavanaugh's nomination...He went on to praise Kavanaugh's judicial record and ask colleagues to judge his "judicial temperament," which came into question during Thursday's angry and disrespectful testimony, on his 12 years in the D.C. circuit court. (Tucson.com)

Definitely Yes John Barrasso (October 4, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is an outstanding legal mind with an impressive judicial record and would make an outstanding addition to the Supreme Court. The political circus must end, and I urge my colleagues in the US Senate to confirm him. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (October 4, 2018): There was no new corroborating evidence. I’m satisfied it was comprehensive, so I feel confident in the report. I’ll just reaffirm my support for Judge Kavanaugh. You have to look at the facts, and the facts present a challenge for her story. (The New York Times)

Unknown Susan Collins (October 4, 2018): It appears to be a very thorough investigation. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Bob Corker (October 4, 2018): The supplemental background investigation found absolutely zero corroboration of the allegations that have been made. I plan to vote for Judge Kavanaugh and believe he will be confirmed very soon. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes John Cornyn (October 4, 2018): A vote against Judge Kavanaugh tomorrow will be a vote for abusing the confirmation process and a good person, and it will be a vote for the shameful intimidation tactics that have been employed as part of an orchestrated smear campaign. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Tom Cotton (October 4, 2018): If those SIX previous checks contained negative information, @SenatorDurbin @SenFeinstein & @SenSchumer would've already leaked it. The stench of desperation from Senate Dems is growing as their disgraceful attacks on Judge Kavanaugh fall to pieces. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Ted Cruz (October 4, 2018): I predict that by Saturday night, Judge Kavanaugh will be Justice Kavanaugh serving on the U.S. Supreme Court. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Mike Rounds (October 4, 2018): Based on what we know so far, my opinion has not changed: it is time to vote and #ConfirmKavanaugh. I have received the supplemental briefing on the FBI’s newest report, along with their previous six reports. They reviewed reports from 10 different witnesses. Nothing new was discovered and still no collaborating evidence. There is time scheduled for us to privately review the report ourselves later today. (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (October 4, 2018): Murkowski told me she concurs with Susan Collins’ view that Kavanaugh probably wouldn’t overturn Roe. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Jon Kyl (October 4, 2018): Just now, @SenJonKyl said of Brett Kavanaugh: "It is more probable than not that the allegations against him are not true." He argued Merrick Garland is not relevant, and Kavanaugh should be judged by his qualifications. (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (October 4, 2018): "You were surprised, why? I think the Democratic strategy is clear. Stall and re-stall...this is smashmouth raw politics," @SenJohnKennedy says. "This is the first time I've really seen the dark side of this place. It's not pretty." (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Charles E. Grassley (October 4, 2018): “There’s nothing in it that we didn’t already know.” Adding, “I trust that the career agents of the F.B.I. have done their work independent of political or partisan considerations. That’s exactly what senators from both sides asked for. Now it’s up to senators to fulfill their constitutional duty and make a judgment. No one is on trial and the Senate is not a courtroom.” (The New York Times)

Likely Yes Ben Sasse (October 3, 2018): “I’m here to talk about the false choice that is being repeated hour after hour after hour on television that this confirmation vote about one vacant seat on the Supreme Court, in that vote we are somehow going to be making a giant binary choice about the much broader issue of whether we do or do not care about women. That is simply not true,” he said...“I urged the president to nominate a woman,” he said. “Part of my argument then was that the very important #MeToo movement was also very new and that this Senate is not at all well prepared to handle allegations of sexual harassment and assault that might have come forward.” (Talking Points Memo)

Definitely Yes Cindy Hyde-Smith (October 3, 2018): I continue to believe Judge Kavanaugh deserves to be confirmed based on his impeccable qualifications. The issue of sexual assault and harassment should be taken seriously, and the Senate has done so. I’ve heard from Mississippians who are upset that Senate Democrats have used unproven allegations to drag Judge Kavanaugh and his family through the mud. While I certainly believe both the accuser and the accused should always be treated with respect, I think the reaction to President Trump pointing out significant inconsistencies in the attacks on Judge Kavanaugh simply reflects a deep frustration with how this process has been politicized. (MississippiToday.org)

Definitely Yes Roy Blunt (October 3, 2018): On the Senate floor earlier today, I reiterated my support for Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation to serve on the Supreme Court. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes David Perdue (October 3, 2018): DP: I do, Hugh. I believe that we’ve done everything we can from Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Judiciary all the way down to this latest FBI investigation. We’ve done everything they’ve asked for. There is absolutely no corroborating evidence. As a matter of fact, the Democrats say well, this is just a he said, she said, and we have to decide who’s telling the truth. No, it’s more than that, because she brought corroborating witnesses, three, who could not corroborate her story. But they did actually corroborate his story. So I believe that we will get 51 votes later this week. (HughHewitt.com)

Definitely Yes Mitch McConnell (October 2, 2018): Flake’s comments came as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) promised that the Senate would vote on the nomination this week without any further delay. “We’ll have the opportunity to vote ‘no’ on the politics of personal destruction. We’ll have the opportunity to vote ‘yes’ on this fine nominee,” he said. (The Washington Post)

Unknown Susan Collins (October 2, 2018): In an interview Tuesday, Collins said she will decide whether to run for reelection next year and is fixated in the meantime on making sure she makes the right decision on what could be the biggest vote of her career. “All I can do is cast the vote I think is correct. If I try to do a political assessment on this vote, it would be wrong given that we’re talking about a Supreme Court nominee,” she said. “No matter how I vote, there will be people who are very unhappy with it.” (Politico)

Definitely No Charles E. Schumer (October 2, 2018): “The greatest issue against Judge Kavanaugh, the one that bothers most people, is his credibility,” Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Tuesday in a speech on the Senate floor. “Is he telling the truth? That issue supersedes all the others.” “There are far too many misstatements, far too many inaccuracies, far too many mischaracterizations,” Schumer said. (The Washington Post)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (October 2, 2018): Sen. John Neely Kennedy (R-La.) said he was still a yes on Kavanaugh but left open the tiniest of chances that the FBI’s findings could change his mind. “My plan is to vote for Judge Kavanaugh, I said that last week, but that doesn’t mean I don’t want to see the results of the FBI report,” he said — refusing to guess whether the results would sway him. (The Washington Post)

Likely Yes Joni Ernst (October 2, 2018): Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who has said she faced sexual harassment when she served in the military and has been an advocate for victims, said on CBS’s “This Morning” on Tuesday she will look at the FBI report for any evidence to corroborate Ford’s accusations. “And if not, I will continue to support Judge Kavanaugh based on the information that I have at this time,” Ernst said. “We are innocent until proven guilty in this great country. . . . She has suffered from something very traumatic in her lifetime, but simply the corroboration wasn’t there.” (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes John Hoeven (October 2, 2018): Senator Hoeven said Tuesday that he supports Judge Kavanaugh's Supreme Court appointment. Hoeven says Kavanaugh has a long record of upholding the constitution on the bench. He says while it's important to treat the accusers with respect, he says he's going with the facts. (KFYRTV.com)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (October 2, 2018): Speaking with Jeffrey Rosen, the president of the National Constitution Center, and Democratic Senator Chris Coons at The Atlantic Festival on Tuesday morning, Flake called the judge’s interactions with lawmakers “sharp and partisan.” “We can’t have that on the Court,” said the Arizona senator, who didn’t elaborate on which interactions he was referring to. (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes John Barrasso (October 2, 2018): It's time to vote to confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court of the United States. Proud to be one of 16 Senators needed to sign the cloture motion to end debate and move to vote on the Kavanaugh nomination. (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (October 2, 2018): “I think there are some Democrats in good faith . . . ” Kennedy, the junior senator from Louisiana, told Carlson from an echo-filled stairwell corridor of the Senate. But. “But I think [for] some of their colleagues, it isn’t about searching for the truth,” he continued. “It’s about winning. Just win, baby, win.”...“These are people — I’m not gonna name names — but I’m not sure they have a soul,” Kennedy said. “I don’t think their mother breast-fed them.” (The Washington Post)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (October 1, 2018): “If you think this is about searching for the truth, you ought to put down the bong,” the lawmaker told host Martha MacCallum. “This is not about the truth. This is about gamesmanship and power, political politics.” (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes Lamar Alexander (October 1, 2018): "Judge Kavanaugh said he'd welcome [an FBI investigation]. I'd welcome it. I don't think it's necessary for me. I am ready to vote for Judge Kavanaugh based on his 26 years of extraordinary service." (localmemphis.com)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (September 30, 2018): "One idea here is that he simply was drinking more than he was saying over this time period and that he didn't remember what happened, and so I was just simply trying to get at that and really couching it in the fact that I had alcoholism in my own family," she told Tapper. Klobuchar said Kavanaugh's denial of ever forgetting something after a night of drinking doesn't add up. "It doesn't quite make sense to me, because, first of all, you have these other people from parts of his life who have said that he was belligerent when he was drunk and other things." (CNN)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (September 30, 2018): Flake, who prompted the new FBI investigation by threatening to withhold his vote to confirm Kavanaugh, said in an interview with “60 Minutes” that investigators would “ask questions that maybe will prompt things” that could “lead to additional interviews that can take place as well.” He also said he found Kavanaugh’s testimony Thursday to be “partisan” at times and that “his interaction with some of the members was a little too sharp.” But, Flake said, he understood his anger. “If I was unjustly accused, that’s how I would feel, as well,” he said. (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/30/2018.) (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes Bill Cassidy (September 29, 2018): Just like their other tactics throughout this confirmation process, Senate Democrats' demands for an FBI investigation have never been about getting the facts or finding the truth. What Senate Democrats really want is more time to smear Judge Kavanaugh, regardless of the toll it takes on his wife, his daughters, and our country. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Michael D. Crapo (September 29, 2018): I also listened very carefully to Judge Kavanaugh as he testified, and I felt that the testimony he gave was also honest. He gave, I thought, very strong testimony that he was not there. I don't feel the evidence shows that Judge Kavanaugh was there that night. I believed his testimony. (Idaho State Journal)

Definitely No Bill Nelson (September 28, 2018): I will vote no on Judge Kavanaugh. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Jeff Flake (September 28, 2018): What I do know is that our system of justice affords a presumption of innocence to the accused, absent corroborating evidence. That is what binds us to the rule of law. While some may argue that a different standard should apply regarding the Senate’s advice and consent responsibilities, I believe that the constitution’s provisions of fairness and due process apply here as well. I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Steve Daines (September 28, 2018): Just got off the phone with Judge Kavanaugh. Very proud to share that the great people of Montana are standing behind him and I look forward to casting my vote to confirm him. #KavanaughConfirmation (Twitter)

Definitely No Patrick J. Leahy (September 28, 2018): It is no secret that I have deep concerns about what a Justice Kavanaugh would mean for the rights of women, for workers, for our healthcare, for unchecked presidential power, and other important issues. I also believe he is unfit to serve on our nation’s highest court because of his history of misleading the Senate under oath...I listened closely to both her and Judge Kavanaugh. And I believe her. I will be voting no on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. He does not have the veracity nor temperament for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in our nation. And no such nominee should be confirmed in the face of such serious, credible, and unresolved allegations of sexual assault. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Boozman (September 28, 2018): Throughout this process, I have noted that his exceptional record on the bench and high level of respect his peers hold for him make Judge Kavanaugh a well-qualified nominee. I continue to hold that view. (Twitter)

Definitely No Mark Warner (September 28, 2018): I’m still a ‘no’ on Judge Kavanaugh. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Ben Sasse (September 28, 2018): Dr. Ford’s family and Judge Kavanaugh’s family are both getting death threats today for one reason: because this process was intentionally turned into a made-for-TV circus by people who care more about politics than they care about either of these families. These serious allegations could – and should – have been investigated back in July through the confidential vetting process that the Judiciary Committee has had for decades. But instead of working through that process, which could have helped restore some public trust, Senator Feinstein hid these allegations from the Judiciary Committee and from the FBI, got Dr. Ford a hyper-political lawyer, and then played this at the most politically destructive moment, after the FBI background investigation had already been concluded. Today, the Senate Judiciary Committee requested that the FBI do a supplemental background investigation. The FBI will report back to us next week – and that report will be carefully considered by the Senate, rather than merely by the badly damaged Judiciary Committee. I'm absolutely heartbroken for both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh. The Senate did not serve either of them well, nor has it served the American people well through this process. (senate.gov)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 28, 2018): Shortly after 4 p.m. Friday, Collins sent out a tweet containing a statement from the Judiciary Committee on the decision to ask the White House to order the FBI to reopen the investigation into Kavanaugh, as long as it is completed within a week. Collins tweeted, “I support this sensible agreement” and then added another comment saying she was “pleased to hear Mark Judge has indicated he would cooperate with the investigators.” (Portland Press Herald)

Definitely Yes John Hoeven (September 28, 2018): On Friday, Hoeven said the new inquiry will come on top of six FBI investigations that Kavanaugh has already undergone. “It appears that this is necessary to secure enough votes for his confirmation, but it should be done expeditiously so that we can complete the confirmation process in a fair and orderly way,” he said in an emailed statement. (The Jamestown Sun)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (September 28, 2018): In the exchange, Klobuchar asked the Supreme Court nominee if he ever had so much to drink he blacked out. Kavanaugh fired back, "Have you?" Kavanaugh later apologized for his question, but the exchange stood out Thursday in testimony from Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. "Well, I was thinking that if I was in his courtroom and acted like that, he would have thrown me out," Klobuchar said. "And I appreciated that he apologized, but at the same time, he didn't really answer the question. And what I was trying to get at was that you have this incredibly convincing testimony in the morning from Dr. Ford." Klobuchar added that Kavanaugh "didn't really answer the question" of whether he ever blacked out. Klobuchar noted that Kavanaugh's college roommate James Roche claimed Kavanaugh became "belligerent" when he drank, but the Republicans who control the Senate Judiciary Committee haven't called on such witnesses to testify. (CBS News)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (September 28, 2018): Heitkamp, who’s facing a tough re-election challenge from Republican Rep. Kevin Cramer, said she agreed with Republican Sen. Jeff Flake’s request for an FBI investigation into the allegations against Kavanaugh before a final vote. President Donald Trump later said he ordered the FBI to complete a limited “supplemental investigation” in less than a week. Before the Senate Judiciary Committee voted in favor of Kavanaugh on Friday, Heitkamp said in an interview she was in “the final stages” of making a decision. “This isn’t an easy decision. And honestly, I don’t think it should be easy for anyone,” the Democratic senator said...Heitkamp said Ford was “believable but we have the strong denials by Kavanaugh.” “We’re going to have to weigh the credibility of each one of those statements,” she said. (The Jamestown Sun)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (September 28, 2018): I walked out, Jay. Republicans are rushing Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation with a sham hearing this morning, less than 24 hours after Dr. Ford had the courage to tell her story in front of the entire country. This is a disgrace. So, instead of sitting through this farce... I walked out. (Fundraising email)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (September 28, 2018): It was a sleepless night. I was getting calls and emails for days from friends and acquaintances saying, “Here’s my story, here’s why I was emboldened to come out.” Dr. Ford’s testimony struck a chord, it really did, with a lot of women...Coppins: As of now, are you planning to vote to confirm Kavanaugh unless the FBI finds something in the next week that changes your mind? Flake: Yes. I’m a conservative. He’s a conservative. I plan to support him unless they turn up something—and they might. (The Atlantic)

Definitely No Jon Tester (September 28, 2018): I have concerns that Judge Kavanaugh defended the PATRIOT Act instead of Montanans' privacy. I have concerns about his support for more dark money in politics. I have concerns about who he believes is in charge of making personal health decisions. And I have deep concerns about the allegations of sexual assault against Judge Kavanaugh. Unfortunately, Judge Kavanaugh couldn't find time to discuss these concerns with me in person, so the only information I have is from what he said in his hearings. I'll be voting against him. (senate.gov)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (September 28, 2018): Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota suggested Friday she may vote no on Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, saying: “There are a lot of lawyers in America who can sit on the court.” Heitkamp said she hasn’t made her final decision, but her comments to the AP provided insight into her thinking. “I think this idea that there’s only one person that can do this job, we all need to recalibrate,” she said following a campaign stop in Grand Forks. She said she found the Thursday Senate Judiciary Committee testimony from both Kavanaugh and his accuser Christine Blasey Ford “compelling.”...But she said “this is not a criminal case” and the standard for judging him shouldn’t be “beyond a reasonable doubt.” (The Detroit News)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (September 28, 2018): Sen. Flake says he’s not sure the FBI investigation will change minds: “I don’t know if any votes will change next week. But at least people can say that we had a better process. And we need that to try to unify the country.” Describing his feelings on Kavanaugh, a worn Sen. Flake pauses and says, “My preference is that we can go ahead and confirm this nominee. I’m a conservative, he’s a conservative. I planned on supporting him before all this came out.” He pauses once more. “And I hope that we can.“ Asked why he changed his mind today, an exasperated Senator Flake says, “This is ripping the country apart.” He pauses. “The calls I’ve been getting. The emails, the texts. It’s been rough to see.” He looks down. “We haven’t had a process we can be proud of.” Before disappearing into the elevators, Sen. Flake adds, “The Anita Hill investigation took just 3 days. So we think that we can move pretty fast.” (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 28, 2018): After a full day of testimony, I continued to express concerns to my colleagues about how this process has been handled by both sides of the aisle. In order to fully and fairly complete our due diligence, allowing the FBI up to one week to supplement its background investigation is appropriate. It is important to have a fair process for the sake of both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford, as well as the integrity of both the judicial branch and the Senate confirmation process. (Anchorage Daily News)

Definitely No Joe Donnelly (September 28, 2018): I have deep reservations about Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to this lifetime position and, as I stated, we have been unable to get all the information necessary regarding this nomination, despite my best efforts. Only 113 people have ever served on the Supreme Court, and I believe that we must do our level best to protect its sanctity. While I would gladly welcome the opportunity to work with President Trump on a new nominee for this critically important position, if Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination comes before the full Senate for a vote under these circumstances, I will oppose it. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Lamar Alexander (September 28, 2018): The FBI investigation ordered by President Trump will be the 7th time the FBI has looked into Judge Kavanaugh’s background and past. The Judge said he has no problem with an FBI investigation and I have no problem with one, but I don’t need one to make my decision. There have already been six FBI background checks since the alleged incident, and everyone who was at the alleged incident says it didn't happen and they've sworn to that. Joe Biden has reminded us that the FBI does not reach conclusions, but hopefully a new report will help us reach a consensus. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Cornyn (September 28, 2018): I’m optimistic. We’ve been in constant communication with all of my colleagues. Some of them have requested additional information, which we’ve gotten for them. I'm optimistic we will confirm the judge. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Cornyn (September 28, 2018): We must always be fair to both the victims and those who stand accused. It has to be a two-way street. I believe he belongs on the nation's highest bench. And in a few more days, after a few more delays, we will finally vote to put him there and say enough with the games. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Richard J. Durbin (September 28, 2018): “Because those scales have been tipped in favor of the one sworn witness who is willing to take her case before the Federal Bureau of Investigation, I will be voting no on the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court,” Durbin said. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Michael B. Enzi (September 28, 2018): As part of the committee’s process, we heard testimony from Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, but I haven’t learned any new facts. My opinion of the judge hasn't changed, and I continue to believe he is a well-qualified nominee. As the Senate moves forward, I will continue to carefully consider all the information before us. I hope the Senate votes on the nomination soon. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Joni Ernst (September 28, 2018): The junior Iowa senator was asked during a brief television interview on Fox News whether she had a message for Kavanaugh, whose nomination is now eligible for a full floor vote but will be delayed until an additional federal investigation is completed. “I would say to him, stay strong, I would say, continue on with the push forward and I would also say, 'God keep you and bless you,' because I do know how painful this process can be," she said...Ernst added during the Fox News interview: "I do hope that we can move through this process as soon as we can and again we'll have to turn to our leadership." (Des Moines Register)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (September 28, 2018): Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy said Friday he will vote to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, saying he believes the judge's denials of sexual assault allegations laid out in a committee hearing a day earlier...Kennedy said he was "reluctant" to agree to the delay but had his hand forced after other senators joined Flake in calling for an investigation, leaving Kavanaugh short of the votes necessary for confirmation..."She didn't convince me — nor does the record — that Brett Kavanaugh was involved," Kennedy said later Friday. Kennedy told reporters he'd asked Kavanaugh "to look me in the eye" and deny Ford's accusations during Thursday's hearing. "He did and I believe him," Kennedy said. The senator reiterated his support for Kavanaugh after striking the agreement for an FBI investigation — telling reporters "I will vote yes" — before later adding that his backing is also "subject to any additional information the FBI produces." (The Acadiana Advocate)

Likely Yes Jon Kyl (September 28, 2018): I am pleased the majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee today voted to send the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the full Senate with the recommendation for approval and that the Senate is now considering it. In addition, the President ordered the FBI to reopen its background check on Judge Kavanaugh for the purpose of interviewing witnesses involved in the recent allegations against him...The statements obtained by the very experienced special investigators on the Judiciary Committee staff are no less valid than interviews by FBI agents; and penalties for perjury are the same. It is worth noting that Judge Kavanaugh has participated in six FBI background investigations throughout his career. We should not be surprised if conflicts among witnesses are still unresolved. (AZCentral.com)

Definitely Yes Marco Rubio (September 28, 2018): Under a sworn oath, Dr. Ford has offered testimony that was unequivocal, compelling and heartbreaking. Under a sworn oath, Judge Kavanaugh offered a denial that was equally unequivocal, compelling and heartbreaking. Under these circumstances, I must make my decision on the basis of evidence and established facts. Especially since voting against Judge Kavanaugh would no longer be simply a rejection of his nomination, but an endorsement of the serious allegations against him. I will not vote against the nomination of someone who I am otherwise inclined to support and in the process add credence to charges which have already done permanent damage to his reputation, on the basis of allegations for which there is no independent corroboration and which are at odds with everything else we have heard about his character. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Dan Sullivan (September 28, 2018): I want Alaskans to know that while I was unable to watch the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in real-time yesterday, I am currently in the process of viewing it in its entirety. Out of respect for this process, Professor Ford, and Judge Kavanaugh, I will wait before offering further thoughts on this hearing. As I’ve stated repeatedly, any allegation of sexual assault needs to be taken seriously. While the Senate Judiciary Committee and its staff have been investigating such allegations diligently, I respect and support the desire of my colleagues for additional information and the decision of the Senate Majority and President for a supplemental FBI investigation, which will hopefully allow this process to move forward in a timely and fair fashion. (Anchorage Daily News)

Definitely Yes John Hoeven (September 27, 2018): In the confirmation process for the Supreme Court we must make decisions based on facts. Judge Kavanaugh has clearly denied the allegations against him. Any allegation of sexual assault is serious however and Dr. Ford gave her account, but the facts do not support that Judge Kavanaugh was involved. All of the people that Dr. Ford said were at the event specifically say they have no recollection of it ever occurring. That includes Dr. Ford’s friend Leland Keyser. It is truly unfortunate that Democrats on the Judiciary Committee did not follow the standard bipartisan investigation practices of the committee. Based on his lifetime record of achievement, I believe Judge Kavanaugh should be confirmed. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Maria Cantwell (September 27, 2018): The Senate should not move forward on the Kavanaugh nomination. Dr. Ford's strong testimony should be enough to stop any further votes before a complete nonpartisan investigation takes place. (Twitter)

Definitely No Jeanne Shaheen (September 27, 2018): “Dr. Ford’s testimony was detailed, moving and credible, and I believe her,” said Shaheen. “I was in awe of her bravery and strength today. I hope her testimony will be a watershed moment in our country for survivors of sexual assault. Women all across the country are making their voices heard and demanding change when it comes to the treatment of women and sexual assault survivors.” Shaheen continued, “While I believe Dr. Ford, it’s in the best interest of the American people for these allegations to be fully investigated by the FBI. Without a thorough, independent investigation there will be a cloud over this process, and this nominee that will damage one of our country’s most vital institutions, the Supreme Court. “Lastly, the threats made to both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh and their families are a sad reflection of the lack of civility in our public debate and are deeply regrettable. We all must do better.” (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Thune (September 27, 2018): Throughout this process, I’ve tried to follow where the facts lead, and despite hearing powerful testimony from Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, we didn’t learn anything we didn’t already know. My opinion of the judge hasn't changed, and the process should proceed. #ConfirmKavanaugh (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Todd Young (September 27, 2018): It was important for both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh to appear before the committee today. I watched the hearing closely and was struck by the power of both testimonies. I was not, however, persuaded that Judge Kavanaugh was involved in this alleged incident 36 years ago. I believe Judge Kavanaugh was truthful under oath during today’s hearing, and I trust the statements of the witnesses named by Dr. Ford who said under penalty of felony that they have no recollection of the alleged incident. After watching today’s hearing, and conducting a thorough and objective review of his nomination, I remain convinced that Judge Kavanaugh is a man of integrity who will be an excellent addition to the Supreme Court. I will be voting to confirm him. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Patrick J. Toomey (September 27, 2018): I found Dr. Ford's testimony to be sincere and moving, but lacking important specifics. Judge Kavanaugh's repeated and unequivocal denial was also sincere and very persuasive. In addition, Judge Kavanaugh's testimony has been corroborated and Dr. Ford's testimony has not. All of the witnesses she claimed were present, including her lifelong friend, either failed to corroborate, or refuted, her testimony. The other allegations against Judge Kavanaugh are either completely unsubstantiated or preposterous. Taking into account today's testimony and everything else that has been presented about Judge Kavanaugh's exemplary character and record, I look forward to voting to confirm him to the Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Thom Tillis (September 27, 2018): I believe Dr. Ford’s claim that she was sexually assaulted by someone, and it is the Senate’s responsibility to look at any evidence available in relation to the nominee. That includes considering the statements of the four witnesses she says were present, who have all denied or disputed Kavanaugh’s presence at the event in question, statements that were provided to the committee under the threat of felony. After listening to today’s testimony, and reviewing all the facts and evidence, I maintain my support for his confirmation. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Jerry Moran (September 27, 2018): As I stated after meeting with Judge Kavanaugh in August, he is a well-qualified nominee with a deep respect for the Constitution, and I still believe that to be true. His intellect and extensive experience in the legal field will serve the Supreme Court well. I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh as Justice Kavanaugh. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes James Lankford (September 27, 2018): Like many other Oklahomans, I watched the Supreme Court nomination hearing of Judge Kavanaugh today to hear the accusation by Dr. Ford and the complete and unequivocal denial of the accusation by Judge Kavanaugh. Dr. Ford deserved to be heard and her allegations taken seriously. But, Judge Kavanaugh also deserved the right to be heard. It was apparent that Dr. Ford experienced a terrible sexual assault as a youth, but there is no evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was the person who assaulted her. All of the witnesses named by Dr. Ford stated they did not remember any party or assault as Dr. Ford described and Judge Kavanaugh, under oath, denied attending this party. Sixty-five people who knew Brett Kavanaugh during high school stated they never saw any behavior like what has been described. Six previous FBI background checks have been carried out over Judge Kavanaugh’s career; none of them have found any accusation of sexual assault or any inappropriate sexual relationship. After a long and painful day of testimony, my opinion of Judge Kavanaugh has not changed. I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh when he is referred from the Senate Judiciary Committee. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Bill Cassidy (September 27, 2018): Enough with the delays. It’s time to #ConfirmJudgeKavanaugh and bring Washington Democrats’ shameful smear campaign to an end. #ConfirmKavanaugh (Twitter)

Definitely No Michael Bennet (September 27, 2018): A hearing is neither a trial nor an investigation. Dr. Ford has made clear in compelling testimony that she is 100% certain Judge Kavanaugh assaulted her. Judge Kavanaugh denies this. Before we vote on a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, the FBI should investigate the underlying facts of the dispute. If Leader McConnell can hold open a Supreme Court vacancy for more than 400 days, the FBI can surely spend the time required for a formal investigation. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Lamar Alexander (September 27, 2018): I will vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh because of his 26 years of distinguished public service and his reputation as a superior jurist, lawyer and teacher. Judge Kavanaugh denies under oath Dr. Ford’s account of an alleged incident 36 years ago. The FBI has conducted six background investigations of Judge Kavanaugh since that alleged incident and found no such conduct. Every person Dr. Ford alleges was present at the incident says under penalty of a felony it didn’t happen. Senate Democrats have treated Judge Kavanaugh as innocent until nominated. They have victimized Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford and their families. They have diminished the United States Senate by their embarrassing irresponsibility. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Rob Portman (September 27, 2018): In America there is a presumption of innocence when there is no evidence to corroborate a charge. Throughout his decades of public service, Judge Kavanaugh has been thoroughly vetted by the FBI on six different occasions, and no such allegation ever surfaced. I have known Judge Kavanaugh for more than 15 years, I know his wife Ashley, and I know his family. The Brett Kavanaugh I know is a man of integrity and humility. He also has the right qualifications and experience to serve on the Supreme Court. In fact, the American Bar Association has given him their highest rating, unanimously. I support his confirmation. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Bob Corker (September 27, 2018): While both individuals provided compelling testimony, nothing that has been presented corroborates the allegation. There is no question that Judge Kavanaugh is qualified to serve on the Supreme Court, and in a different political environment, he would be confirmed overwhelmingly. I believe Judge Kavanaugh has conducted himself as well as anyone could expect throughout this process and plan to vote to confirm him. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Doug Jones (September 27, 2018): The Kavanaugh nomination process has been flawed from the beginning and incomplete at the end. Dr. Ford was credible and courageous and I am concerned about the message our vote will be sending to our sons and daughters, as well as victims of sexual assault. I will be voting no. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 27, 2018): Lindsey Graham on Hannity: "I am now more convinced than ever that he didn’t do it, that he’s the right guy to be on the court, that Ms. Ford has got a problem and destroying Judge Kavanaugh’s life won’t fix her problem." (Twitter)

Likely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (September 27, 2018): .@ckmarie: Do you think Dr. Ford seems like a credible witness? @SenCapito: I think her testimony is riveting. (Twitter)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (September 27, 2018): KELLY: I want to start with a few rapid-fire questions. Did you find Christine Blasey Ford's testimony credible? LEAHY: I found it compelling and very credible. I was a prosecutor. If I'd had somebody with that kind of a complaint coming before me as a prosecutor, I'd feel very safe in prosecuting based on it. KELLY: Did you find Brett Kavanaugh's testimony credible? LEAHY: I did not. I found it well-rehearsed. I wondered if it was aimed more for the White House and President Trump than the members of the committee...KELLY: Merrick Garland. So your strategy for tomorrow is if there's a vote, you vote no. LEAHY: Well, I don't know how you're going to vote aye on something that's being rushed through like this. (NPR)

Definitely Yes Cindy Hyde-Smith (September 26, 2018): It seems opponents of Judge Kavanaugh are engaged in character assassination to destroy the reputation of a devoted public servant and a loving husband and father. I, for one, will not stand by and watch it happen. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Cindy Hyde-Smith (September 26, 2018): It is time to bring Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation to a vote on the floor of the United States Senate. He has earned my support. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Bill Cassidy (September 26, 2018): Everybody will make their own decision. Based on what I’ve seen about these two minutes in time that are being alleged to be the issue here, everything seems to support Brett Kavanaugh. But the others will make their own decision. I hope they make the one that attests to the man’s character. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Margaret Hassan (September 26, 2018): The eyes of the country – and the world – are upon us, and I fear what they will see in the coming days. It is not too late for the Senate to pause this sham process and make clear that this body listens to survivors and takes their experiences, and their pain, seriously. However, if the Senate continues on its present course, it will be an abject failure by this body that will not soon be forgotten. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 26, 2018): From my view, just when you thought it couldn’t get any worse, it just did. The lawyer to porn stars has just taken this debacle to an even lower level. I hope people will be highly suspicious of this allegation presented by Michael Avenatti. I have a difficult time believing any person would continue to go to – according to the affidavit – ten parties over a two-year period where women were routinely gang raped and not report it. Why would any reasonable person continue to hang around people like this? Why would any person continue to put their friends and themselves in danger? Isn’t there some duty to warn others? I very much believe in allowing people to be heard. But I am not going to be played, and I’m not going to have my intelligence insulted by the Michael Avenattis of the world. I will not be a participant in wholesale character assassination that defies credibility. (Twitter)

Unknown Jeff Flake (September 26, 2018): Flake says "winning at all costs is too high a cost" and that Kavanaugh and Blasey Ford are "human beings" who should be treated with respect, condemning the rancor in the debate. "We've lit a match, my colleagues. My question is: do we appreciate how close the powder keg is?" Jeff Flake says sexual assault is a serious allegation and asks what message it sends to young women if it is dismissed without "open minds" listening to both Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh. .@JeffFlake wraps his speech without indicating how he'll vote on Kavanaugh, but saying he takes the allegations seriously and will watch the hearing before deciding. (Twitter)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 26, 2018): Collins reviewing Avenatti allegations and says she takes it “very seriously.” Wants hearing to go forward but unsure if Senate could be voting on Kavanaugh over the weekend (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Mitch McConnell (September 25, 2018): Projecting optimism, Mr. McConnell signaled that Republicans would be ready to move forward quickly after Thursday’s hearing. “We’re going to be moving forward; I’m confident we’re going to win,” he told reporters. (The New York Times)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 25, 2018): “I had not made a decision, and obviously the hearing Thursday is an important one,” Ms. Collins told reporters on Tuesday. She expressed concern about Ms. Ramirez’s accusation and suggested that the Judiciary Committee question her under oath as well as Dr. Blasey. (The New York Times)

Likely Yes Bob Corker (September 25, 2018): Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee, said he was not persuaded by Ms. Ramirez’s story. “I read The New Yorker article. It’s pretty thin. No one else remembered any of it,” he told reporters. “This is really getting kind of carried away, it’s feeling more like a circus. But again, I did feel like this first accuser should be heard.” (The New York Times)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 25, 2018): Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) says he remains confident Kavanaugh will be confirmed to the Supreme Court. “I don't think any Republican doubts he's qualified. The only thing you could be concerned about is his character.” More: Graham said there’s a conflict between the accusations and what else is known about Kavanaugh’s character. “Everything we know about his character seems to go opposite of the allegations.” (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 25, 2018): I just asked Sen. Lisa Murkowski, key GOP swing vote, if there should be a full FBI investigation into allegations from Kavanaugh’s past. “It would sure clear up all the questions, wouldn’t it?” she said (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Thune (September 25, 2018): Is this what Democrats want subsequent Supreme Court confirmations to look like? A hyper-partisan process in which character attacks don’t have to be backed up with actual evidence? In which innuendo can substitute for information? And where a presumption of guilt is the order of the day, no matter how shaky or unsubstantiated the allegations? Mr. President, I’ll say it again, I am deeply disappointed in my Democrat colleagues. And I look forward to hearing from Judge Kavanaugh later this week. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (September 25, 2018): [Q:] So it sounds like you don’t think he’s credible or ready for this promotion [to the Supreme Court], as you put it. [A:] Definitely not. And by the way, I think it’s very telling that both Dr. Ford and Ms. Ramirez have asked for an F.B.I. investigation, but he has totally resisted. (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/25/2018.) (The New York Times)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 25, 2018): Murkowski told me her response to CNN was "perhaps somewhat flip" and she's not calling for the FBI to investigate. She says the committee is investigating and she wishes Sen. Grassley released more info about that. (Twitter)

Definitely No Debbie Stabenow (September 25, 2018): And Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, the No. 4 Democratic leader, said she likes the way the Democratic vote count is trending. “I feel good about it,” she said. "Overwhelmingly, people are voting no." Asked whether there are still really a half-dozen undecided senators, she offered her own internal whip count: “Less, maybe.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/25/2018.) (Politico)

Likely No Bill Nelson (September 25, 2018): Nelson, who's in a close reelection battle against Florida Gov. Rick Scott, said Tuesday he also wants to hear from Ford before deciding. Asked whether he also wants Deborah Ramirez, a woman alleging sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh during his college years, to testify, Nelson replied: “Of course.” (Politico)

Unknown Doug Jones (September 25, 2018): Jones has tweeted repeatedly about the importance of a thorough investigation into Ford’s allegation, and said Tuesday that he also would wait until Thursday to announce his decision. “I’m going through the process," he said. (Politico)

Unknown Jon Tester (September 25, 2018): Tester said Tuesday that, while he’s watching the Thursday hearing closely, he’s also concerned about his inability to set an in-person meeting with the judge. “We’re getting close to the end here. I don’t know if we’re ever going to find a time or not,” Tester said, adding that he wants to discuss issues such as privacy, campaign finance law and abortion. “If I don’t meet with him, it’s a problem.” (Politico)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (September 25, 2018): “I’m very open. I haven’t closed any doors at all on Kavanaugh. I just want to make sure there’s a fair, open and civil hearing,” said Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, perhaps the most conservative Democrat. “The man has to have a chance to clear his name, but these ladies have the complete opportunity to tell their story.” Manchin said the allegations haven’t made him any less likely to vote against Kavanaugh than he was two weeks ago: “It hasn’t changed anything. I’m still waiting for this hearing.” (Politico)

Definitely Yes Richard M. Burr (September 25, 2018): Democrats made it clear they would stop at nothing to block President Trump’s Supreme Court pick before Judge Kavanaugh was even chosen as the nominee. President Trump has every right to nominate the individual of his choosing to the Supreme Court, and the Senate should go through the normal advice and consent process, as it has done for the last 12 weeks. Immediately following the conclusion of Thursday’s hearing, the Senate Judiciary Committee should vote up or down on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. I intend to support Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination when it comes before the full Senate. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 24, 2018): When it comes to stopping Pres @realDonaldTrump and his agenda there seem to be no boundaries. Whether it’s coaching witnesses or reporting thinly-sourced stories without proper verification, everything is fair game and falls into the category of – ‘The Ends Justify the Means.' What we are witnessing is the total collapse of the traditional confirmation process for a Supreme Court nominee. It is being replaced by a game of delay, deception, and wholesale character assassination. Clearly when it comes to President Trump, elections – in the eyes of Democrats – have no consequences. In my view, the process needs to move forward with a hearing Thursday, and vote in committee soon thereafter. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Orrin G. Hatch (September 24, 2018): Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah warned Monday of "phony accusations" following a newly surfaced allegation of inappropriate sexual behavior against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and suggested that Democrats are to blame, saying, it's not unusual "for our friends on the other side to pull that kind of crap." "It's amazing to me that these allegations come out of nowhere at the last minute and that they weren't brought up earlier in this process, and it's not untypical for our friends on the other side to pull that kind of crap," Hatch said when asked by reporters about an accusation against Kavanaugh from a woman named Deborah Ramirez published in The New Yorker on Sunday. Ramirez said that she remembers Kavanaugh exposing himself to her at a dormitory party more than three decades ago. CNN has not independently confirmed The New Yorker's reporting. Hatch appeared to liken Ramirez's allegation to "phony accusations." "No, I think we can look into that accusation," Hatch told reporters on Capitol Hill. "You're going to have these phony accusations come always. It's always the case when you have a contested situation. We should give due listen to everyone who has a comment here, but we're down to the rug-cutting time, and we're going to have this marked-up at the end of the week. So it's time to get down to business." He added of Ford's allegation, however, "I think she is sincere, at least I hope so, but I think she is sincerely wrong." (CNN)

Definitely Yes Mitch McConnell (September 24, 2018): Addressing the latest Kavanaugh allegations, @SenateMajLdr McConnell says "This is what the so-called resistance has become. A smear campaign, pure and simple, aided and abetted by members of the United States Senate." Doesn't sound like Republicans are backing down...at all. (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 24, 2018): “We are now in a place where it’s not about whether or not Judge Kavanaugh is qualified,” Ms. Murkowski said in an extended interview on Monday night in the Capitol. “It is about whether or not a woman who has been a victim at some point in her life is to be believed.”...In the interview, Ms. Murkowski emphasized how invested she was in assessing Dr. Blasey’s story. Her view that an “arbitrary timeline” should not scuttle a potential hearing helped nudge Republicans toward reaching an agreement with the accuser’s lawyers last weekend. She canceled a meeting of the Senate committee she leads on Thursday to ensure her schedule was clear. And although she is not on the Senate Judiciary Committee, she will be watching. “All you can try to do is be as fair as possible to ensure that at the end of the day justice is delivered,” Ms. Murkowski said...In the interview, Ms. Murkowski was not so dismissive of the accusations. “We are at just a difficult place because the conversation is not rational on either side,” she said. She added: “Just look at some of the hateful things that are being said out there. How do you dial that back?” “We need to be able to listen,” she said, pledging to take Dr. Blasey seriously. “We have to listen to what she will say on the record, under oath, and what Judge Kavanaugh will say on the record, under oath.”...Ms. Murkowski said on Monday that Judge Kavanaugh had laid out for her a powerful case about the importance of precedent and the “reliance of interest” it creates. “How he articulated how it had been reinforced in so many different steps, I certainly have greater confidence with the way that he portrayed to me how he views Roe,” she said. (The New York Times)

Definitely No Christopher A. Coons (September 24, 2018): I publicly said I will vote against Judge Kavanaugh based on his extreme views as a judge about presidential power. These additional allegations are gravely concerning, but after his confirmation hearing I concluded I could not support him for the Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (September 24, 2018): Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said Monday that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh deserves a “right to clear himself” at the upcoming Senate hearing about the allegation of sexual assault made by professor Christine Blasey Ford. “All this is extremely serious and we take it very serious, but again these are allegations that are made and they have to come forth and prove their statements and he has a right to clear himself,” Manchin said. (Talking Points Memo)

Definitely No Christopher A. Coons (September 24, 2018): “These new allegations are deeply concerning and reinforce the need for the FBI to investigate claims against Judge Kavanaugh. Everyone - the accusers, Judge Kavanaugh, and the American people - would benefit from a professional, impartial, federal investigation,” said Senator Coons. “I agree with Ranking Member Feinstein’s call for an immediate postponement of this week’s hearing and investigations into these claims.” (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 24, 2018): "We’re in the Twilight Zone when it comes to Kavanaugh," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News on Capitol Hill. Later Monday evening, in an interview with Fox News' "Hannity," Graham said the allegations against Kavanaugh are "collapsing." Graham charged that Democrats' complaints about "rushing" the Kavanaugh confirmation vote are "like an arsonist complaining about a fire," noting that Senate Democrats knew about California professor Christine Ford's allegations about Kavanaugh in July but did not publicize them until days before a crucial Judiciary Committee vote earlier this month. (Fox News)

Likely Yes Marco Rubio (September 24, 2018): Asked whether he was still a yes vote, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said: “I want to see what happens in the hearing on Thursday. I can only vote based on the information before me.” (Politico)

Likely Yes John Thune (September 24, 2018): “Once we get a chance to have a hearing, then we’ll figure out where we go from there. I think our members are taking this very seriously,” said Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 3 Republican. “Most of our members are going to wait ‘til Thursday. … Thursday is kind of the key day in this.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/24/2018.) (Politico)

Likely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (September 24, 2018): “Let’s wait and see what happens on Thursday. I am very supportive of Judge Kavanaugh, but I want to hear her testimony,” added Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.). (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/24/2018.) (Politico)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 24, 2018): “I’m ready to move forward after the hearing as soon as possible," Graham declared. "I have no doubt something happened to Ms. Ford. I really don't know her. What I've got before me is unknown time, unknown location, no credible verification. Unless that changes, that's where I'm at." (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/24/2018.) (Politico)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 24, 2018): Collins said the Judiciary Committee needs to interview Ramirez “under oath.” “I’m eager for the hearing to take place this Thursday and hear from both Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford,” Collins said. “I have not made a decision.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/24/2018.) (Politico)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 24, 2018): "As with any allegation out there, it is our responsibility to look into it and treat allegations with the serious consideration they deserve,” Murkowski said. (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/24/2018.) (Politico)

Definitely Yes Tom Cotton (September 24, 2018): The Democrats are engaged in a campaign of delay and character assassination against Judge Kavanaugh. It’s time to vote this week. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Jon Kyl (September 24, 2018): The past 10 days seem to have rattled even some of Kavanaugh’s most ardent supporters. Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) was working as Kavanaugh’s sherpa to get him confirmed before being appointed to the Senate after the death of John McCain, but he didn’t want to talk about Kavanaugh at all on Monday as the nomination hung in the balance. “I don’t have any stand. I’m still working really hard to figure out where to go and how to get there,” said Kyl, who used to be the No. 2 Republican. Asked whether something in the Judiciary hearing on Thursday could change his mind about Kavanaugh, he replied: “I don’t know. I’m not going to be in the Thursday hearing, I’m not on the Judiciary Committee.” (Politico)

Definitely No Christopher A. Coons (September 23, 2018): I have made up my mind that I'm voting against Judge Kavanaugh, and that's based on his jurisprudence. (MSNBC)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (September 23, 2018): I'm writing to you today because I am angry. I am angry at the way Senate Republicans and Donald Trump's administration are treating Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who last week bravely came forward to share her story about Trump's Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. I am angry that Trump and his cronies will do absolutely anything to take over the Court—even if it means putting an alleged sexual predator on the bench. I am angry that some of the very same senators who smeared and humiliated Anita Hill 27 years ago are trying to get away with it again. And I am angry that Dr. Blasey Ford is being forced to endure this patently unfair process while facing ruthless intimidation and even threats to her life. (MoveOn fundraising email)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 23, 2018): Asked if there's anything Ford can say to change his vote on Kavanaugh, @LindseyGrahamSC says he'll hear her out but... "I'm just being honest: Unless there's something more, no, I'm not going to ruin Judge Kavanaugh's life over this." #scpol (Twitter)

Definitely No Patty Murray (September 23, 2018): “How the Senate handles this and the Senate Republicans handle this will be a test of this time, of 2018, in the #MeToo movement,” Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, said on “Meet the Press.” Ms. Murray, who was elected in 1992 after Senate hearings on Anita F. Hill’s sexual harassment allegations against Clarence Thomas, then a nominee for the Supreme Court, said the question for the Senate this week was: “Can we do better?” (The New York Times)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (September 22, 2018): North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D) on Saturday blasted her GOP Senate challenger Rep. Kevin Cramer over comments he made about the sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. “Congressman Cramer’s comments are disturbing and they don’t reflect the values of North Dakota,” Heitkamp said in a statement to The Hill. Heitkamp issued the statement after Cramer appeared on a North Dakota radio station Friday and called Christine Blasey Ford's allegations against Kavanaugh “absurd” given the circumstances. (The Hill)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 21, 2018): Maine Sen. Susan Collins said she was “appalled” by President Trump’s tweets Friday morning that criticized Christine Blasey Ford for not coming forward sooner with her allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Speaking at an event in Portland, Collins appeared to offer support for Ford, who has said Kavanaugh tried to sexually assault her 36 years ago, when they were both in high school. The senator stopped short, though, of saying whether she believed Ford’s explosive allegations. “I was appalled by the president’s tweet,” Collins said. “First of all, we know that allegations of sexual assault – I’m not saying that’s what happened in this case – but we know allegations of sexual assault are one of the most unreported crimes that exist. So I thought that the president’s tweet was completely inappropriate and wrong.”...“I do think that both she and Judge Kavanaugh need to testify under oath, but I believe we should attempt to make this as comfortable a process for her as possible,” Collins said. “To me, Monday is the preferred date but I don’t see a problem with delaying to Wednesday or Thursday.” Collins said, for her, hearing from Ford directly is critical. “It’s very difficult to assess credibility if you don’t get to see the person or hear them and that’s what I want,” she explained. (Portland Press Herald)

Likely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (September 21, 2018): U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito says she’s “very uncomfortable” with the way sexual assault allegations have come forward against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Speaking Friday on 580-Live with Charleston Mayor Danny Jones on MetroNews affiliate 580-WCHS in Charleston, Capito said one of her Senate colleagues should have treated the allegations she received in a letter from accuser Christine Blasey Ford differently. “I think that’s the unfairness of it. (California Senator) Diane Feinstein’s had this since July 30. She’s had opportunities for private questioning. Why didn’t she assert herself there and then? I think that just adds fuel to the fire to make it more divisive than ever,” Capito said...Capito said the allegations are very serious and judiciary committee members will have some very important decisions to make. “We have to be sensitive to what she’s accusing him of, I think that’s important. I am,” Capito said. “But at the same time, there’s two sides of the story. People say it’s just going to boil down to he said, she said. It probably will. I think the senators on judiciary committee are going to judge the veracity on that point.” (WVMetroNews.com)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 21, 2018): Collins said she discussed the Roe decision extensively with Kavanaugh in the context of whether he believes in precedents, “including decisions made in 1973 and reaffirmed by the court again and again.” Collins said Kavanaugh told her he did believe in such precedents. In fact, Collins said, the answer he offered her was similar to statements affirming the concept of precedents that she got from John Roberts and Elena Kagen before she voted for them to join the Supreme Court. The remark was her biggest tip of hand yet on how she might vote on Kavanaugh...However, Collins said she really wanted to get to the bottom to the allegation made by a woman who said Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her when they were both in high school. She wants both to testify under oath and said it would be “very helpful in making my assessment” on how to vote. In response to a question whether she would hire someone accused of sexual assault to join her staff and whether the same standard applies to Kavanaugh said she would never hire someone credibly accused of sexual assault, “if it’s credible, of course not.” “We don’t know enough yet, so I can’t reach that conclusion” she said of the question about Kavanaugh in particular. “In the end,” Collins said, “I have to be able to look in the mirror and say I did what I thought was right.” (The Boston Globe)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 21, 2018): Well, first of all, I do not believe he's gonna repeal Roe v. Wade...I am [undecided]. How could I decide before hearing the testimony of Professor Ford?...I'm close. I'm very close. But I'm not all the way there yet. And Professor Ford deserves to be heard. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Mitch McConnell (September 21, 2018): McCONNELL makes a promise at the Values Voter Summit: "You've watched the fight. You've watched the tactics. But here's what I want to tell you: In the very near future, Judge Kavanaugh will be on the United States Supreme Court." (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 21, 2018): Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski told CNN on Friday she plans to wait until after Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault, testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee before deciding whether to back Kavanaugh's nomination. "What I have to do next week, assuming that the hearing moves forward, which I am truly hoping it does, that is the end, hopefully, of this vetting process that I have been engaged in," she said here Friday. "That's when I will make my determination in regards to Judge Kavanaugh."...The Alaskan senator, who as a more moderate Republican is seen as a key swing vote, also said Trump's tweet Friday morning claiming that Ford should have reported her allegation immediately after the alleged incident took place was not "helpful." "I think that where we are right now with the Senate and (the) Judiciary Committee particularly, going through its process, a process that hopefully will allow for an airing of the allegations Dr. Ford has submitted in writing ... but equally important is a fair opportunity for Judge Kavanaugh to respond," she said. "That's what we should be focusing on."...Murkowski said she believes the issue of the allegations against Kavanaugh is now in the Senate Judiciary Committee's hands rather than those of the FBI. "I think it's important to realize, as has been said before, when a nominee is advanced there is an FBI review background investigation that comes. In fact, with Judge Kavanaugh, because he has been a nominee on multiple occasions now, he's actually had six different FBI reviews, if you will," she said. "The FBI basically doesn't make a determination on this as matter. ... So I think right now where we are is you have a committee process that needs to advance, again to allow this story to be told, and responded to appropriately." (CNN)

Definitely No Christopher A. Coons (September 20, 2018): I don't see why it is so urgent that we have this final confirmation hearing with Judge Kavanaugh just a few days from now. And it is my hope that we will demonstrate that we have learned some things in the last few decades since the confirmation of Justice Thomas, that we recognize and respect that for Dr. Ford to come forward with this truly disturbing allegation must be very difficult for her. It has put her and her family at risk. It has brought forward decades old disturbing memories and I respect and understand the challenge she has had making the brave decision to offer this information to the Senate Judiciary Committee. I think if we're to try and demonstrate the best traditions of the American Congress and of our system, we will try and craft a hearing that is both fair and appropriate to Judge Kavanaugh and gives him an opportunity to be heard, but that also demonstrates that we believe Dr. Ford, that we welcome her testimony, and that we will provide her an opportunity to be heard after an appropriate investigation by federal law enforcement. (senate.gov)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Unknown Doug Jones (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Tom Udall (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Catherine Cortez Masto (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Patty Murray (September 20, 2018): Dr. Ford—who is in hiding & facing death threats—has spoken clearly, and she should be believed. There is no reason for Republicans to attack her for reasonably requesting a basic level of fair treatment & human decency. This hearing should be delayed. (Twitter)

Definitely No Sheldon Whitehouse (September 20, 2018): 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. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Catherine Cortez Masto (September 19, 2018): While I unfortunately didn't get a chance to sit down & discuss my concerns with #JudgeKavanaugh, it's clear that Brett Kavanaugh is a threat to women's rights. I look forward to voting NO on this nominee because nothing less than a woman's right to choose is on the line. (Twitter)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (September 19, 2018): “The more information we have, the better,” said Donnelly, joining his party’s leadership in calling for the FBI to investigate Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation. “It’s somebody who will be there likely for the next 40 years, so I try to err on the side of caution in getting it right.” Donnelly said he hopes both Kavanaugh and Ford will give sworn testimony Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee, and he also would like to hear testimony from Mark Judge, a Kavanaugh childhood friend who Ford has said was in the room when the assault happened in the early 1980s, when she was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17. Judge has said publicly that he does not want to testify, but Donnelly said the committee should use its subpoena power to compel his testimony. Donnelly said if Ford’s story is deemed credible, Kavanaugh should be disqualified from consideration for the seat, since he already has denied the allegation to lawmakers, and the allegation is so serious. “If what Ms. Ford is saying is true, that’s sexual assault,” Donnelly said. “That’s an extraordinarily serious issue. I saw somebody talked about it as rough horseplay. Rough horseplay is not when the young lady thinks that because a hand has been put over her mouth, she might not get out of there alive.”...Many on the right have gone further than Braun’s “eleventh hour” comment, saying they don’t believe Ford’s story because she has waited more than 30 years to go public, in the final days before Congress was expected to vote on the nomination, strictly because she is a liberal who’s out to block the conservative Kavanaugh from the court. “I can’t think of a worse thing to say,” Donnelly said of such sentiments. “How do you put yourself in her shoes, when you’re 15 or 16 years old and you have this happen to you? There are contemporaneous notes from her psychiatrist from around 2012. She may well have been in a position of just trying to make it through the day and make it to tomorrow. That’s what we’re trying to figure out.” (South Bend Tribune)

Definitely No Claire McCaskill (September 19, 2018): While I am also uncomfortable about his view on Presidential power as it relates to the rule of law, and his position that corporations are people, it is his allegiance to the position that unlimited donations and dark anonymous money, from even foreign interests, should be allowed to swamp the voices of individuals that has been the determining factor in my decision to vote no on his nomination. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Dean Heller (September 19, 2018): “I’m really grateful for the White House, for the effort of President Trump and what he has done, and the excitement that we have,” he said. “We got a little hiccup here with the Kavanaugh nomination, we’ll get through this and we’ll get off to the races,” he said. (The Nevada Independent)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (September 19, 2018): On Wednesday, she doubled down, saying on CNN’s “New Day” that “this kind of behavior — sexual harassment, sexual assault — it’s been going on." “It’s not just something for the women in this country to care about,” she said, “it’s for all of us. That’s why I’ve said to the men: ‘Just shut up and step up.’ And you know, for the men who are offended by this, you should ask yourself: Why are you offended by this? Why don’t you ask yourself: What about this offends you? We should all be holding together. We should all be treating each other like human beings.” (The Washington Post)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 19, 2018): I hope that Dr. Ford will reconsider and testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday. It is my understanding that the Committee has offered to hold either a public or a private session, whichever would make her more comfortable. (Twitter)

Definitely No Catherine Cortez Masto (September 19, 2018): After carefully reviewing Judge Kavanaugh’s record and listening to his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I have determined that his stance on a woman’s right to choose is extreme and disqualifies him from a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. From his challenge of Roe v. Wade as ‘settled law’ during his time as a White House attorney to his far-fetched dissent denying a 17-year-old undocumented immigrant in detention from accessing an abortion, I have no doubt that his confirmation would tip the balance of the Supreme Court to end Roe v. Wade and imperil American women’s reproductive freedom. (senate.gov)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 19, 2018): Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) on Wednesday said while she believes it “reverses the normal order of things” to ask the FBI to reopen its background investigation of Supreme Court nominee Judge Kavanaugh, in order to investigate Christine Blasey Ford’s claim of sexual assault against him, she would consider involving the bureau at some point. “It is the Senate’s constitutional responsibility to assess the nominees, and then if we need additional help from the FBI, the committee could ask for it,” Collins said in an interview on Maine radio station WVOM. (Talking Points Memo)

Unknown Doug Jones (September 19, 2018): “First of all, I think the FBI needs to do a background check update on Brett Kavanaugh,” Jones said. “The fact that the president says the FBI doesn’t do it, is just not the case, they do it all the time with nominations.”...Jones said the process is being rushed, using artificial deadlines. “The fact is, we need to make sure we get it right, not that we get it according to a clock that Chairman Grassley set,” Jones said. Jones said he understands claims like the Kavanaugh accusation are hard on the accuser and the accused. “I’m a former prosecutor, I know how hard it is for victims to talk about their experiences, particularly in the case of sexual assault,” he said...“We need to be able to test these allegations, out of fairness to both Dr. Ford and to Judge Kavanaugh,” Jones said. “A public hearing before the full committee would be a spectacle without a true fact-finding mission that goes on a non-partisan basis." The committee doesn’t plan to call an alleged witness to testify, Kavanaugh friend Mark Judge. Jones thinks the committee should subpoena Judge and hear from all three people. “Have the witnesses come testify, and to testify under oath,” Jones said. “That oath, that oath a witness takes, means something and the witnesses know that.“ (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/19/2018.) (WHNT.com)

Definitely Yes John Barrasso (September 18, 2018): “Senator Barrasso believes Dr. Ford should be given a fair and dignified opportunity to testify about a very serious allegation,” a spokesperson said. “Because Democrats chose to withhold this account throughout the nomination and until after public hearings concluded, Kavanaugh deserves the same opportunity to respond. He supports the Senate Judiciary Committee’s decision to consider the allegation prior to a vote.” Barrasso’s office did not add whether he had changed his mind on a commitment to vote for Kavanaugh, a pledge he made after endorsing him Aug. 2. (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/18/2018.) (Casper Star Tribune)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 18, 2018): I'm writing to the Chairman & RM of Judiciary Cmte respectfully recommending that at Monday’s hearing, counsel for Prof. Ford be allocated time to question Judge Kavanaugh & counsel for the Judge be granted equal time to question Prof. Ford, followed by questions from Senators. (Twitter)

Unknown Jeff Flake (September 18, 2018): When Dr. Ford came forward, I said that her voice should be heard and asked the Judiciary Committee to delay its vote on Judge Kavanaugh. It did so. I now implore Dr. Ford to accept the invitation for Monday, in a public or private setting. The committee should hear her voice. (Twitter)

Definitely No Christopher A. Coons (September 18, 2018): So I thought it was important to make it clear that I already have heard enough to, in my view, justify a no vote. (MSNBC)

Likely Yes Bill Cassidy (September 18, 2018): Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, told The Advocate on Tuesday that he’ll be watching as the Judiciary Committee tries to sort out the accusations. Cassidy said he hoped additional evidence or witnesses might be able to settle the truth beyond what he called a “he said, she said" situation. “The committee needs to evaluate it and I think they’re going through that process,” Cassidy said. “Let’s let it play.” (The Advocate)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (September 18, 2018): "I expect all of the enlightened men in our country, 'cause there must be millions of men out there who are enlightened, who also will rise up to say we cannot continue the victimization and the smearing of someone like Dr. Ford,” Hirono said. “And you know what, she is under no obligation to participate in the Republican efforts to sweep this whole thing under the rug, to continue this nomination on the fast track and to participate in a smear campaign and basically a railroad job. This is what they did to Anita Hill.”...“Guess who is perpetrating all of these kinds of actions? It’s the men in this country,” Hirono said. “I just want to say to the men in this country: Just shut up and step up. Do the right thing, for a change.” (The Washington Post)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (September 18, 2018): Kennedy, who earlier this month said he’d vote “happily and proudly” to confirm Kavanaugh, said he now needs to hear from Ford directly before moving forward. Kennedy said Kavanaugh, 53, rejected Ford's allegations when Kennedy spoke to him by phone on Tuesday. Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the accusation and said in a statement Monday that he wanted to "refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity." “I need to hear from Ford, what happened, what does she remember. I’ve got to hear from her,” Kennedy said. The senator wouldn’t say whether he’d consider Kavanaugh unfit for the Supreme Court if he becomes convinced Ford’s allegations are true. Republicans are “going to get somebody on the Supreme Court, and I think it’s going to be Judge Kavanaugh, but I want to be fair to everybody and we’re not even close to being there yet,” Kennedy said Tuesday afternoon. “I think Professor Ford’s going to come Monday and we’ll have a full hearing, hopefully publicly.”...“I’m not preparing for this (hearing) like I would prepare for a normal confirmation hearing where I prepare questions ahead of time,” Kennedy said of Ford's and Kavanaugh’s potential appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I want to hear first-hand the story and the rebuttal. I don’t want this to turn into a court of law or a cross-examination — I want to allow Dr. Ford the opportunity to tell her side of all of this.” (The Advocate)

Likely Yes Joni Ernst (September 18, 2018): Iowa Senator Joni Ernst says “every accuser should be heard.” She’s withholding judgment on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh until after Monday’s senate hearing to examine the sexual assault allegation against Kavanaugh. “I need to hear what’s going to come out on Monday. I can’t say whether the source is credible or not credible. I don’t know that, but I do believe that if she is accusing him of something so egregious, she needs to be heard,” Ernst told Radio Iowa earlier this afternoon. “Every accuser should be heard.”...“I think that any accuser needs to have his or her voice heard…It’s important that we hear not only from the accuser, but from Judge Kavanaugh,” Ernst said. “He should be able to rebut anything that’s said.”...Ernst faulted Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the panel, for failing to alert Grassley this summer when Feinstein first learned of the allegations. “He’s done so much work on whistleblowers and protecting their privacy…I know that if this woman had brought her information forward to Senator Grassley he would have wanted to get to the bottom of it,” Ernst told Radio Iowa. “Unfortunately, it’s being used as a political football right now and brought up at the very last-minute instead of during the hearing process when it should have come out and they could have questioned Judge Kavanaugh on the information.” (RadioIowa.com)

Likely Yes Michael B. Enzi (September 18, 2018): Enzi, who voted to confirm Kavanaugh to be a United States Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2006, has not said in explicit terms whether or not he would vote for the justice, only that he supported his nomination and was excited to review his qualifications. His office refrained from any specific opinions on the current state of the nomination process. “The Senate Judiciary Committee is still reviewing the nomination,” his office said in a statement. “Senator Enzi is closely following these deliberations.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/18/2018.) (Casper Star Tribune)

Likely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (September 18, 2018): “Senator Capito believes this allegation should be taken seriously and that both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh should be given the opportunity to share their accounts publicly with the Judiciary Committee,” spokeswoman for Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., said. “She hopes to learn more as Chairman [Chuck] Grassley, his staff and committee members look into these claims.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/18/2018.) (Charleston Gazette-Mail)

Definitely Yes Tom Cotton (September 18, 2018): U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton appeared on a conservative radio show yesterday and said, "My opinion of Judge Kavanaugh has not changed. He's made an unequivocal and categorical denial of these 36-year-old allegations and every known fact so far supports that denial". (Arkansas Times)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (September 18, 2018): Senator Mazie Hirono thinks Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is not telling the truth about the sexual assault he allegedly committed as a teenager. She thinks he wasn’t telling the truth to the Judiciary Committee when he claimed not to remember any sexual misconduct by a judge he clerked for who was forced to resign last year after allegations from more than a dozen women. And the Hawaii Democrat says that if she gets to question Kavanaugh in another hearing, she’s going to tell him that the revelations over the weekend—when Christine Blasey Ford came forward to accuse Kavanaugh of attempting to rape her at a high-school party in the early ’80s—now make her doubt what the nominee said under oath two weeks ago even more. (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/18/2018.) (Politico)

Likely Yes Bob Corker (September 18, 2018): After learning of the allegation, Chairman @ChuckGrassley took immediate action to ensure both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh have the opportunity to be heard, in public or private. Republicans extended a hand in good faith. If we don’t hear from both sides on Monday, let’s vote. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Ted Cruz (September 17, 2018): Cruz also said Ford should have a "full opportunity to tell her story before the Judiciary Committee, and Judge Kavanaugh should have a full opportunity to defend himself." But while Cruz called for such a hearing to take place "sooner, rather than later," he stopped short of calling for a public hearing or delaying Thursday's scheduled committee vote, as Democrats have demanded. (Houston Chronicle)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 17, 2018): One key GOP lawmaker, Susan Collins of Maine, told reporters Monday that if Kavanaugh was lying or holding back about the episode, it would be disqualifying. "For my part, I believe that it's very important that both Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh testify under oath about these allegations," Collins told reporters. "I need to see them and listen to their answers to the questions in order to make an assessment." (Houston Chronicle)

Definitely No Christopher A. Coons (September 17, 2018): After reviewing the portion of Judge Kavanaugh’s long record of public service that is available to us, meeting with him privately, participating in a robust four-day hearing, submitting detailed written questions, and hearing from thousands of Delawareans, I have concluded that Judge Kavanaugh holds views on several critical issues that are well outside the mainstream of American constitutional jurisprudence. I have profound concerns about Judge Kavanaugh’s extreme positions, and I have decided to vote against his nomination. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Roy Blunt (September 17, 2018): “These are serious allegations that need to be looked at closely by the committee before any other action is taken,” Blunt told the Post-Dispatch in a statement issued by his office. (St. Louis Post-Dispatch)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (September 17, 2018): Professor Christine Blasey Ford deserves to be heard and Judge Kavanaugh deserves a chance to clear his name. Both have said they are willing to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee and I hope they will be given the opportunity to do that as quickly as possible. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Lamar Alexander (September 17, 2018): In a statement Monday, Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, said the committee should "carefully consider Dr. Ford's allegation and Judge Kavanaugh's response," before alleging that Democrats in the Senate may have known about the allegation prior to Kavanaugh's hearing, which he described as "troubling." (Tennessean.com)

Definitely Yes Orrin G. Hatch (September 17, 2018): Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, told reporters Monday that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh categorically denied allegations that he committed sexual assault at a high school party in the early 1980s -- and told the senator he was not at a party similar to what his accuser described...In a statement to Fox News, Hatch's office said that Kavanaugh told the senator "he was not at a party like the one [Ford] describes" and added that Ford "may be mistaking [Kavanaugh] for someone else."...Hatch, the Senate president pro tempore and third in the presidential line of succession behind Vice President Mike Pence and House Speaker Paul Ryan, told CNN that Kavanaugh was "upset" about the allegation and described him as "a very strong, decent man." "I think she's mistaken," the 84-year-old Republican said of Ford. "She's mistaken something, but I don't know her." Hatch's office later tweeted that the senator "does not have enough information about Dr. Ford and her accusations but looks forward to hearing more from her to get to the bottom of things." (Fox News)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 17, 2018): Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh should both testify under oath before the Judiciary Committee. (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Cornyn (September 17, 2018): Cornyn, in a statement, said the Judiciary Committee "should treat this with the seriousness it deserves, in a way that is fair to both the individual making the accusation and the judge himself." He added that lawmakers "can do that through regular order and with bipartisan participation in a spirit of collaboration and concern for all involved.... which respects confidentiality." "That Democrats have so egregiously mishandled this up until now," Cornyn continued, "is no excuse for us to do the same. If Democrats reject the committee handling this swiftly and in a bipartisan way through regular order, then it's clear that their only intention is to smear Judge Kavanaugh and derail his nomination." Asked what regular order would entail, a Cornyn spokeswoman cited the process outlined by Grassley: "The standard procedure for updates to any nominee's background investigation file is to conduct separate follow-up calls with relevant parties," Grassley said in a statement."In this case, that would entail phone calls with at least Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford." (Houston Chronicle)

Likely Yes Thom Tillis (September 17, 2018): Senate Judiciary Democrats deserve the criticism they are receiving from across the political spectrum for making a conscious decision to sit on this serious allegation for nearly two months without taking action. They have badly mishandled this and have done a disservice to the accuser, Judge Kavanaugh, and the American people. Allegations of misconduct must be taken seriously. That requires a fact-based process that is fair and respectful to both the accuser and the accused. The Senate Judiciary Committee is beginning an investigation and is inviting both individuals to appear before the committee next week to ensure the allegation is thoroughly vetted and both individuals have a chance to speak. I support this decision. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (September 16, 2018): In a statement to The Post, Feinstein said: “I agree with Senator Flake that we should delay this week’s vote. There’s a lot of information we don’t know and the FBI should have the time it needs to investigate this new material. Staff calls aren’t the appropriate way to handle this.” (The Washington Post)

Unknown Jeff Flake (September 16, 2018): In an interview with The Post, Flake said that Ford “must be heard” before a committee vote. “I’ve made it clear that I’m not comfortable moving ahead with the vote on Thursday if we have not heard her side of the story or explored this further,” said Flake, who is one of the committee’s 21 members. Republicans hold an 11-to-10 majority on the panel, and Flake’s opposition to a vote could stall the nomination. Flake would not specify what form the communication with Ford should take or how he would vote. But he emphasized the significance of the allegations. “For me, we can’t vote until we hear more,” he said. (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes Thom Tillis (September 16, 2018): "I believe that the member that first received that letter was as late as July, and quite honestly, I'm shocked that the matter didn't come up in the nearly 32 hours of testimony that Judge Kavanaugh was before us, in the open sessions or the nearly hour, hour and a half session that we had in a closed session," Tillis said Sunday. "That information never came up." Tillis said that that committee intends to look into the matter upon returning to Washington this week, but "it really raises a question in my mind about, if this was material to the confirmation process, why on Earth, over the past four to six weeks, hasn't it been discussed among the committee members?" Tillis also questioned the timing of the letter's existence becoming public, and why the letter's author would not come forward in a confidential setting. (CBS News)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (September 16, 2018): It took a lot of courage for Christine Blasey Ford to come forward to share her story of sexual assault by Brett Kavanaugh. Her story is very credible and I believe her. As I said during the hearing, this is why the #MeToo movement is so important, because often in these situations, there is an environment where people see nothing, hear nothing, and say nothing. That is what we have to change. This development is yet another reason not to rush Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination. The Committee should postpone this week’s vote. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Patty Murray (September 16, 2018): Senator Patty Murray, Democrat of Washington, went one step further, invoking Anita Hill, who came forward during Justice Clarence Thomas’s 1991 confirmation hearings to accuse him of sexual harassment. “I was motivated to run for the Senate after watching the truly awful way Anita Hill was treated by an all-male Judiciary Committee interrogating her about the sexual harassment she endured at the hands of now-Justice Clarence Thomas,” Ms. Murray said in a statement, adding that the hearings must be delayed. (The New York Times)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (September 16, 2018): Senator Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee, called the accusations “extremely serious” and said they “bear heavily on Judge Kavanaugh’s character.” She urged critics of his accuser to stop “the attacks and stop shaming her.” (The New York Times)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 16, 2018): Ms. Collins said in an interview on Sunday night that she considered the allegations serious and that Ms. Ford needed to be personally interviewed to get a fuller account. But Ms. Collins, who could conceivably decide the outcome in the narrowly divided Senate, said Democrats had done a disservice to both Ms. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh with their handling of the accusations. “What is puzzling to me is the Democrats, by not bringing this out earlier, after having had this information for more than six weeks, have managed to cast a cloud of doubt on both the professor and the judge,” she said. “If they believed Professor Ford, why didn’t they surface this information earlier so that he could be questioned about it? And if they didn’t believe her and chose to withhold the information, why did they decide at the 11th hour to release it? It is really not fair to either of them the way it is was handled.” (The New York Times)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (September 16, 2018): “I support Mrs. Ford’s decision to share her story, and now that she has, it is in the hands of the FBI to conduct an investigation. This should happen before the Senate moves forward on this nominee," Feinstein said Sunday afternoon. (Politico)

Definitely Yes John Kennedy (September 16, 2018): Just hours before Ford went public, Sen. John N. Kennedy (R-La.) of the Senate Judiciary Committee predicted Kavanaugh will win narrow confirmation. “They’ve had this stuff for three months; if they were serious about it, they should have told us about it,” Kennedy said on “Fox News Sunday.” “I think every Republican will vote for Judge Kavanaugh. I think at least two, and maybe more, Democrats will” vote for him. (Politico)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (September 16, 2018): Later Sunday, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a moderate who had yet to say how she will vote, echoed the notion that the vote might need to be delayed. “If there is real substance to this, it demands a response,” she told CNN. (Politico)

Unknown Jeff Flake (September 16, 2018): "If they push forward without any attempt with hearing what she's had to say, I'm not comfortable voting yes," Flake said. "We need to hear from her. And I don't think I'm alone in this." (Politico)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 16, 2018): Collins told CNN on Sunday that she was "very surprised" by the now-public allegations, but did not know enough to make a judgment. She said she raised the allegations during a phone call with Kavanaugh on Friday before the accuser went public over the weekend. Asked if she wanted the Senate Judiciary Committee to delay its planned vote this week on Kavanaugh's nomination, Collins was noncommittal. "I'm going to be talking with my colleagues, but I really don't have anything to add at this point," Collins said Sunday. (CNN)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (September 16, 2018): We cannot meet our constitutional responsibility of advice and consent without a fair and careful review of the serious and credible allegations made by Dr. Ford. The Thursday Judiciary Committee vote must be postponed and the FBI must be called on to complete a professional investigation. We also must respect and listen to Dr. Ford, who is now a target of personal attacks because she had the courage to come forward. To be clear, the confirmation process for Judge Kavanaugh has been flawed from the very start and there are already serious questions about the nominee’s credibility. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (September 16, 2018): Supreme Court justices should not be an extension of the Republican Party. They must also have unquestionable character and integrity, and serious questions remain about Judge Kavanaugh in this regard, as indicated in information I referred to the FBI. For these and other reasons detailed below, I strongly oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. (Los Angeles Times)

Unknown Doug Jones (September 16, 2018): In a tweet after The Post’s report, Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) said it was “a very brave step” by Ford to come forward. “It is more important than ever to hit the pause button on Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote until we can fully investigate these serious and disturbing allegations. We cannot rush to move forward under this cloud,” said Jones, a potentially key swing vote who has not announced whether he will support Kavanaugh’s nomination. (The Washington Post)

Definitely No Charles E. Schumer (September 16, 2018): “To railroad a vote now would be an insult to the women of America and the integrity of the Supreme Court,” Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. (The Washington Post)

Likely Yes Lindsey Graham (September 16, 2018): Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) said he agreed with the committee’s concerns about the “substance and process” regarding Ford’s allegation — although he said he would “gladly” listen to her if she wanted to talk to lawmakers. “If the committee is to hear from Ms. Ford, it should be done immediately so the process can continue as scheduled,” Graham, a member of the committee, said Sunday afternoon. (The Washington Post)

Unknown Bob Corker (September 16, 2018): In a statement, Corker said a delay “would be best for all involved, including the nominee. If she does want to be heard, she should do so promptly.” (The Washington Post)

Definitely No Patrick J. Leahy (September 13, 2018): Over four decades, I have voted for more Republican-nominated judges — including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. — than the vast majority of Republicans. I do my best to evaluate each on the merits. Setting aside my concerns about what a Justice Kavanaugh would mean for the rights of Americans, I cannot support a nominee for a lifetime seat to our highest court who cast aside truth in pursuit of raw ambition. Unimpeachable integrity must never be optional. (The Washington Post)

Definitely Yes John Barrasso (September 12, 2018): It is clear that Judge Kavanaugh has the right approach to being a judge. It is clear that he is a person of solid character – and that he has a strong intellect. It is clear that America needs Judge Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court – and that it’s time for Democrats to give up this pointless obstruction. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Angus King (September 12, 2018): As I began, there is no second chance on this, and given the stakes as well as what we do know of his record, I have no choice but to vote no. (senate.gov)

Unknown Susan Collins (September 12, 2018): I am still completing my due diligence. I spent an hour today going through the committee’s sensitive documents at the Judiciary Committee that have not yet been released. I would note, however, that every document Democrats asked to have cleared and released was released by the order of the Justice Department and President Bush. So what I’m finding is that a lot of the information has not necessarily been accurately presented, and that’s why I think it’s really important I continue my review. I am also going to be talking to the judge later this week with a few more questions that I have. (KPAX.com)

Definitely No Mark Warner (September 11, 2018): This is the most consequential Supreme Court vacancy in a generation, yet it has been the least transparent confirmation process in recent history. Thanks to unprecedented efforts by the Trump Administration to conceal large portions of Judge Kavanaugh’s record and the nominee’s unwillingness to answer basic questions before the Judiciary Committee, much of Judge Kavanaugh's record and judicial philosophy remain a mystery to the American people. But what we have seen provides reason enough to vote against this nominee. His past rulings, writings, and evasive answers before the Judiciary Committee lead to the inescapable conclusion that, as a Supreme Court justice, Judge Kavanaugh would seek to undermine and eventually overturn Roe v. Wade, and would fail to protect people with pre-existing conditions from discrimination by insurance companies. I am also deeply troubled by Judge Kavanaugh’s views on executive power. We currently have a president whose conduct is at the center of a federal criminal investigation, but in his testimony before the Judiciary Committee, Judge Kavanaugh refused to say whether he thinks it is constitutional for presidents to be investigated, and whether he continues to believe that the president has the power to fire a prosecutor criminally investigating him. In this country, no one, not even the president, is above the law. Should the president’s legal team decide, as they have threatened, to contest that principle in court, it is imperative that the Supreme Court ensure that the president is held accountable. For all these reasons, I must vote no on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. (senate.gov)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (September 11, 2018): “It is clear now that not only did Judge Kavanaugh mislead me when it came to his involvement in the Bush Administration’s detention and interrogation policies, but also regarding his role in the controversial Haynes nomination,” Durbin said. “This is a theme that we see emerge with Judge Kavanaugh time and time again – he says one thing under oath, and then the documents tell a different story. It is no wonder the White House and Senate Republicans are rushing through this nomination and hiding much of Judge Kavanaugh’s record—the questions about this nominee’s credibility are growing every day.” (senate.gov)

Definitely No Michael Bennet (September 11, 2018): After reviewing his writings, opinions, and testimony, I have concluded that Judge Kavanaugh will create a new Supreme Court majority that will threaten women’s reproductive rights, roll back essential environmental regulations, and favor large corporations over workers. In addition, his view that sitting presidents may be immune from criminal investigations and subpoenas is particularly troublesome at this moment. For these reasons, I will oppose his nomination. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Sheldon Whitehouse (September 10, 2018): The Supreme Court needs to stand alone, tall and independent, and Americans should feel confident their cases will be decided on the merits, not the identities of the parties or the identities of big interests appearing behind the scenes. Judge Kavanaugh has failed to give Americans that assurance, and he will not get my vote. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Margaret Hassan (September 10, 2018): I have watched Judge Kavanaugh’s responses during his nomination hearings. I have examined his judicial writings and past public statements. I have also reviewed the limited number of documents that Republicans agreed to share with the American people -- and I will vote no. (Twitter)

Definitely No Jeanne Shaheen (September 10, 2018): “The Senate cannot perform its constitutional duties to advise and consent without a full view of Judge Kavanaugh’s record. The lack of document production and the nominee’s refusal to answer basic questions about his judicial record and philosophy make it impossible to conclude anything other than the Senate Majority and Judge Kavanaugh are deliberately concealing his record from the American people. That is unacceptable for someone who is being nominated to serve a lifetime appointment on the nation’s highest court,” said Shaheen. “While much of Judge Kavanaugh’s record remains a mystery, what we do know is extremely troubling and dangerously out of step with the American people, particularly on critical issues including executive power, abortion rights and pre-existing conditions. The President remains the focus of a sprawling criminal probe and has nominated a judge to the Supreme Court with an expansive view of executive power – no one, not even the President, is above the law and no defendant should be permitted to choose his or her own judge. Furthermore, Judge Kavanaugh’s inability to remember if he has discussed the Special Counsel’s investigation with President Trump’s defense team is extremely alarming,” continued Shaheen. In closing Shaheen said, “Judge Kavanaugh’s past rulings on abortion demonstrate that he is willing to infringe on a woman’s constitutionally-protected right to make her own reproductive decisions, and his failure to answer questions about the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act’s protections for pre-existing conditions puts the health and well-being of millions of Americans at risk. After careful consideration of his record and reviewing the limited documents made available to the U.S. Senate, I have come to the conclusion that I cannot support Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.” (senate.gov)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (September 9, 2018): But time is quickly running out to stop Donald Trump’s dangerous nominee. We can't stop Kavanaugh without a massive outcry. We need an outcry at least as huge as the uproar that stopped Trumpcare last year. (MoveOn fundraising email)

Definitely No Tim Kaine (September 7, 2018): I will oppose the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the United States Supreme Court. I have diligently studied his record of academic writings and judicial opinions. I have read the limited documents we’ve been provided from his time working for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr and the Administration of President George W. Bush. I have interviewed him face-to-face in my office. And I have observed his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. I conclude that Judge Kavanaugh should not be confirmed to the Supreme Court, particularly at this pivotal time in our nation’s history, because he cannot be counted on to serve as an independent check on the President or to uphold critical precedents that affect the wellbeing of millions of Americans. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Roy Blunt (September 7, 2018): "Justice Kavanaugh I think will be Justice Kavanaugh - Judge Kavanaugh. Three hundred opinions, 13 of them almost in total accepted by the Supreme Court - there's a real record there, more than you normally have. And frankly, I think he came through the week in a way that's going to guarantee that he has a bipartisan vote and I think will be on the court before the court starts this year's business the first Monday in October." (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 9/7/2018.) (NPR)

Likely Yes Charles E. Grassley (September 7, 2018): We have one of the most qualified people ever to be nominated to the Supreme Court, Judge Kavanaugh, on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals for 12 years. An outstanding record of interpreting law the way Congress passes it, not doing what some judges do, try to fill in the blanks and be super legislatures. Secondly, interpreting the Constitution according to the way it was written by the authors of the Constitution and thirdly, showing an outstanding understanding of people that come before him but not using his personal views, but just reading the law, what the law says and the facts of the case and making his judgement based upon that law. Also I should say, he comes with outstanding recommendations from law clerks that he’s had, students he’s taught at Harvard and Yale and they all speak very highly of him being personable, being smart, but most importantly caring about people. He shows caring about people by being a coach for his girls’ basketball teams over a five or six year period of time so far. He’s also worked at congregate meals at his local Catholic church and he’s just a very down to Earth fella. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Bill Cassidy (September 7, 2018): Fellow Louisiana GOP Sen. Bill Cassidy also came out in support of Kavanaugh after the hearings wrapped up Friday. "Judge Kavanaugh’s qualifications are impeccable and he passed the hearing process with flying colors," Cassidy said, "so I will vote for him without reservation, absolutely.” (The Advocate)

Definitely Yes John Kennedy (September 7, 2018): Kennedy said Friday that he’d read all of Kavanaugh’s law review articles, read hundreds of opinions and heard enough from Kavanaugh to endorse him. “There’s no question in my mind that he has the intellect to be a Supreme Court justice,” Kennedy said. “He’s breathtakingly smart. I don’t know that I’ve seen anybody with a better command of the law.” (The Advocate)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (September 6, 2018): So, what we have here is a rushed confirmation process, hundreds of thousands of withheld or missing documents, and a nominee handpicked by right-wing special interest groups who won’t even answer our questions. (Fundraising email)

Definitely No Maria Cantwell (September 6, 2018): As a United States Senator, it is my responsibility to thoroughly review lifetime appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court. I take this responsibility to provide advice and consent very seriously. When President Trump nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh, I owed it to my constituents to review his full record. After having done so, I oppose his confirmation. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Boozman (September 5, 2018): Joined @4029news yesterday to talk about Judge #Kavanaugh as his confirmation hearings got underway. He's a person of character & a bright legal mind who will uphold the Constitution. On the merits, he's a highly-qualified nominee who would make a great #SCOTUS Justice. (Twitter)

Definitely No Christopher S. Murphy (September 4, 2018): Let’s call it like it is: The Supreme Court is turning itself into a political arm of the Republican Party. They’ve weakened organized labor, upheld Republican gerrymandering, and gutted voting rights laws. Kavanaugh’s confirmation would codify this development for generations to come. We have to do everything we can to stop him. (Fundraising email)

Definitely No Brian Schatz (September 4, 2018): I’ve seen enough. I will vote no. As long as the republicans refuse to release 96 percent of the Kavanaugh records, this process is illegitimate. Every other SCOTUS nominee has turned over nearly everything, and I am now convinced they are hiding something. (Twitter)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (September 4, 2018): This vacancy on the Supreme Court is one of the most consequential fights of the last several years, and I want you to know I am prepared to do everything in my power to stop this nomination. (Fundraising email)

Definitely Yes Steve Daines (September 2, 2018): Montanans overwhelmingly want a Supreme Court Justice with impeccable academic credentials, someone who does not legislate from the bench, but upholds the rule of law and who follows the Constitution. Judge Kavanaugh is without a doubt that person. (Montana Standard)

Definitely Yes Ron Johnson (September 2, 2018): “Brett Kavanaugh, an extraordinary judge. A long record – 12 years on the D.C. Circuit Court bench. Over 300 decisions. The Democrats have more than enough information to understand that this is a highly qualified jurist that should be the next Supreme Court justice.” (senate.gov)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (September 2, 2018): During the interview, Klobuchar also lamented that it's “not normal” that Trump is not allowing senators to see more than 100,000 documents from Kavanaugh's time working in the George W. Bush administration and that about 148,000 of the ones they have seen are not allowed to be shared with the public. Klobuchar said that if she could comment on the documents now shielded from the public, she could raise “interesting questions” about Kavanaugh's qualifications. "It would certainly strongly bolster the arguments that I could make,” she said. (The Washington Post)

Definitely No Charles E. Schumer (September 1, 2018): He said: “We’re witnessing a Friday night document massacre. President Trump’s decision to step in at the last moment and hide 100,000 pages of Judge Kavanaugh’s records from the American public is not only unprecedented in the history of Supreme Court nominations, it has all the makings of a cover-up.” Schumer added: “Republicans in the Senate and the president of the United States are colluding to keep Judge Kavanaugh’s records secret, and trying to hide their actions from the American people by doing it on the Friday night of a holiday weekend. What are they trying so desperately to hide?” (Fox News)

Definitely No Elizabeth Warren (August 28, 2018): I've been doing everything I can to stop Donald Trump's nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. (MoveOn fundraising email)

Definitely No Cory Booker (August 27, 2018): Meanwhile, Brett Kavanaugh, Trump's Supreme Court nominee, has argued that a sitting president cannot be criminally indicted or even a subject of a criminal investigation while in office. The consequences of his confirmation could be enormous: Kavanaugh could become Trump's shield against accountability. We must let Special Counsel Robert Mueller complete his investigation before proceeding with any Supreme Court confirmation hearings. No American citizen under criminal investigation is able to choose their own judge. The president shouldn’t be an exception. (MoveOn fundraising email)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (August 24, 2018): 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)

Definitely No Cory Booker (August 24, 2018): 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)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 24, 2018): 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)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (August 24, 2018): 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)

Likely No Christopher A. Coons (August 24, 2018): 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)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (August 24, 2018): 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)

Likely No Sheldon Whitehouse (August 24, 2018): 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)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (August 24, 2018): 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)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 24, 2018): 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)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (August 24, 2018): 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)

Definitely No Sherrod Brown (August 24, 2018): Today, U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) said he cannot support Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh because Kavanaugh would threaten the rights of Ohioans. Brown came to his decision after carefully reviewing Kavanaugh’s record and meeting with the nominee face-to-face. “After thoroughly reviewing his record, meeting with him face-to-face, and listening to Ohioans, I am convinced Judge Kavanaugh would side with special interests over working people and threaten the rights of Ohioans,” Brown said. “Special interests already have armies of lobbyists and lawyers on their side. Working people need Justices who will put their rights first, not Justices who will side with insurance companies over cancer survivors, financial scammers over customers, or massive corporations over American workers.” (senate.gov)

Unknown Claire McCaskill (August 24, 2018): “I’m going to wait until his hearing and watch him be cross-examined about his record. But I am — I feel like I’m back in law school, I’m reading so many opinions,“ the Missouri Democrat told a group of roughly 50 supporters gathered at a local Teamsters hall. “But I have not made a decision yet. I probably won’t until after the hearings.”...Asked if she was satisfied after the meeting, McCaskill said. “I don’t know how to characterize satisfied. I don’t think that’s a characterization I would make. I still have a lot more information I need to get.” (Roll Call)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (August 23, 2018): This afternoon Judge Kavanaugh and I met for the first time. We discussed a wide range of issues, many suggested by Alaskans who have been in touch with me about the nomination. From privacy to precedent, executive power, vouchers, Indian law, and healthcare, including women’s reproductive rights and protections for pre-existing conditions –we had a substantive conversation. It also was important that I seek Judge Kavanaugh’s understanding of the unique legal issues that arise in Alaska. I also appreciated the opportunity to gain more insight into his judicial philosophy. What I am seeking is a Supreme Court Justice with the character, the intelligence, and the balance to impartially apply the law to the facts of the case. Today’s meeting represents an important step in my vetting process. That process, however, has not concluded. I look forward to learning more about Judge Kavanaugh’s views during his appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee in September. (senate.gov)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (August 23, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh also had the opportunity today to respond to a letter I sent him 11 years ago about his testimony to the Judiciary Committee in 2006. Despite his sworn testimony that he was never involved in ‘questions about the rules governing detention of combatants,’ Judge Kavanaugh confirmed to me today that he was involved with internal Bush Administration discussions about litigation and policy regarding the detention of enemy combatants. By any reasonable understanding, Judge Kavanaugh’s 2006 statement was misleading at best. I also asked him about developments this week that put us on threshold of a constitutional crisis. Fundamental questions about the accountability of the President may soon come before the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh was an aggressive proponent of investigating President Bill Clinton, but changed his view after working for President George W. Bush. He would not say today whether he believed a sitting president was subject to a subpoena or criminal indictment. The American people need answers to these questions. It would be an abdication of the Senate’s constitutional responsibility of ‘advice and consent’ to consider Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination without first obtaining these documents and answers. What is in these documents that Judge Kavanaugh does not want America to see? (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 22, 2018): Yesterday I met with Judge Kavanaugh. I had the opportunity to ask him about many issues, including his work in the Bush White House. Following our meeting, I believe even more strongly that documents he authored or contributed to during his three years as the White House Staff Secretary should be released and made public now. A vigilant review of a Supreme Court nominee’s full record is not optional. And it should not depend on what party controls the White House. Today, it is undeniable that documents of clear public interest are being hidden from the American people. Documents that would shed a light on both his views and his fitness to serve on our Nation’s highest court. Wearing blinders in this moment is fundamentally incompatible with our constitutional obligation to provide advice and informed consent...The Senate should not be focused on getting Judge Kavanaugh confirmed by October 1st. The Senate should be focused on doing its job. And that requires allowing the National Archives to complete its review of Judge Kavanaugh’s record as required by the Presidential Records Act. At a time when the President is facing unprecedented legal jeopardy, it would be an extraordinary disservice to the American people to break all precedents and confirm his selection to the Supreme Court without an actual review...We should set this partisan vetting aside and work together to actually vet Judge Kavanaugh’s record in a way that honors both our constitutional obligation and the job the American people sent us here to do. (senate.gov)

Unknown Tim Kaine (August 22, 2018): The senator argues that rushing to come out against Kavanaugh’s nomination “makes the process less helpful to the American public.” “If everybody takes a position before the hearings, why have the hearings? ... You could just discharge and put something right on the floor and then that would be really bad for the American public so I think that the right thing to do on a Supreme Court nominee is to meet with them, wait for the hearing,” Kaine told The Hill...“I want to always have a meeting with a Supreme Court nominee. I think it’s the single most important nomination that the Senate ever has to consider,” he said. (The Hill)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 22, 2018): It is difficult to reconcile the Judiciary Committee’s inaction here with its race to confirm President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court. The timeline that Republicans are pursuing to consider Judge Kavanaugh is so aggressive that it will sideline the nonpartisan review of the nominee’s record performed by the National Archives, which has occurred for every Supreme Court nominee since Watergate. (senate.gov)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (August 22, 2018): Dem WV Sen Manchin says he disagrees with Schumer about delaying Kavanaugh hearing over Cohen guilty plea. Says “that’s not right..we have a job to do.” (Twitter)

Unknown Doug Jones (August 22, 2018): Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala., added his name to the handful of Democrats who on Wednesday said that Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination should be held up in light of the guilty plea of the president's former personal lawyer and the eight guilty verdicts against President Trump's former campaign manager, Paul Manafort. Jones said Kavanaugh's nomination should be held up not just because of those legal cases. Alabama's junior senator cited the trove of documents that the Senate Judiciary Committee has yet to obtain from Kavnaugh's tenure as President George W. Bush's staff secretary. "I think we need to push a pause button right now and let this play out just a little bit," the senator told MSNBC. "And you couple [the legal cases] with the fact that we haven't got the full set of documents, I think it only makes sense."...Jones said the Manafort convictions and the Cohen plea - which he called "two bombshells" - are "undermining this presidency." He said the cases also make Kavanaugh's stance on presidential power more relevant. "You cant ever determine where this will end up. But I think it does raise the stakes a bit on that part of the Kavanaugh record," Jones said. While some Democrats have cancelled meetings with Kavnaugh following the legal developments, Jones has not gone that far. "If the schedule holds, then yes, I'm going to go forward with it," he said. "I'm not going to cancel that." (AL.com)

Definitely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 22, 2018): I will be voting no on Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States. (senate.gov)

Unknown Susan Collins (August 22, 2018): 🔥SUSAN COLLINS tells me she sees "NO BASIS" for delaying Kavanaugh hearings. (Twitter)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 22, 2018): Mr. Chairman, I want to take a moment to react to yesterday’s news of the conviction of the President’s campaign chairman and the guilty plea of his personal lawyer to crimes, at the direction of the President, designed to influence the 2016 election. As I and others have said many times in the last two years, these are not normal times. And these are certainly not the times for this Committee to consider a Supreme Court nominee of this President, especially a nominee who thinks the President should be immune from investigation. We cannot abandon common sense in this dangerous time for our democracy. So, as I have said before, we should delay this hearing for Judge Kavanaugh. For so many reasons it is not the time. I will also be cancelling my meeting with Judge Kavanaugh. This President, who is an unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal matter, does not deserve the courtesy of a meeting with his nominee—purposely selected to protect, as we say in Hawaii, his own okole. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Michael D. Crapo (August 21, 2018): “Judge Kavanaugh is a respected jurist, with a sterling reputation for intellectual rigor and attention to legal detail. He understands the proper role of a judge in our legal system–to fairly interpret the law, not create it,” said Crapo from the Senate floor. “He thinks deeply about the legal questions before him and strives to build consensus on the court.”..."Judge Kavanaugh’s experience and legal background are not in dispute. His readiness for the Supreme Court is not contested. His law clerks vouch for him. Lawyers who argue before him commend him for his fairness, judgement, and temperament. His peers admire and respect his intellect and draw regularly from his opinions. In short, he is a judge’s judge." (senate.gov)

Unknown Claire McCaskill (August 21, 2018): I welcomed the opportunity to talk with Judge Kavanaugh about his views on ensuring Missourians retain criticalhealthcare protections, removing dark money from politics, and guaranteeing powerful corporate interests don’t prevail over individual Americans—and look forward to hearing more about how he approaches these issues during his upcoming confirmation hearing. (senate.gov)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (August 21, 2018): “Republicans said we are going to have a new rule when it comes to Republicans nominees from the Trump Administration in the case of Brett Kavanaugh. And that new rule said that we will not ask for documentation from the 35 months when he served in the Bush White House as the closest advisor to the President of the United States,” Durbin said. “There were a myriad of issues that were considered by the President in that period of time, and Brett Kavanaugh, then assistant-to-the President, was involved in these decisions. We won’t know what he said or did because Republicans have refused to ask for the documentary evidence of his time there.” (senate.gov)

Definitely No Kirsten E. Gillibrand (August 21, 2018): “What Judge Kavanaugh intends to do is overturn Roe v. Wade,” Gillibrand said. (Erie News Now)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 21, 2018): The critical comments come just two weeks before Hirono and fellow members of the Senate Judiciary Committee will begin confirmation hearings. She wants to hear how, if at all, Kavanaugh will protect the Obama-era legislation. “His dissents indicate serious concerns that I would have about his ability to be fair and impartial,” Hirono said of Kavanaugh’s judicial record. (Erie News Now)

Definitely No Charles E. Schumer (August 21, 2018): Schumer credited Kavanaugh for allowing them to go over their scheduled 45-minute meeting time but complained that he refused to answer basic questions. “I asked him if he agreed that Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood were correctly decided,” Schumer told reporters. “He would not say yes. That should send shivers down the spine of any American who believes in reproductive freedom for women.” Kavanaugh also failed to say whether Obamacare is constitutional or whether a sitting president must comply with a subpoena, Schumer added, in addition to failing to recall key moments from his time as staff secretary and counsel in George W. Bush’s White House, which Schumer framed as further evidence that Democrats should be given access to documents from that time. “His lack of recollection on almost everything didn’t ring true,” Schumer said. “He’s a bright man. He recalls a lot. But on every key question like those, he said, ‘I couldn’t’ recall.’” Schumer argued that Kavanaugh is in a unique position as a Supreme Court pick who was nominated after the president vowed to appoint only judges who would overturn abortion rights. “Judge Kavanaugh has a special obligation to make his views on this topic clear,” Schumer said. “I reminded him repeatedly that he’s in a unique position: No other president has nominated someone to the Supreme Court after saying, ‘I will only nominate someone who overturns Roe v. Wade.’ He had a special obligation to dispute that if he didn’t agree with it. He did not. At all.” (Politico)

Unknown Susan Collins (August 21, 2018): In a more than two-hour meeting in my office today, Judge Kavanaugh and I had a productive, informative discussion about a wide range of issues, including: his judicial philosophy, his respect for precedent, and the importance of an independent judiciary. We also discussed Roe v. Wade, the role of the Special Counsel, executive power, the 2nd Amendment, the Affordable Care Act and protections for those with pre-existing conditions, as well as the circumstances surrounding his nomination. I specifically asked Judge Kavanaugh if he had made any commitments or pledges to the Federalist Society, or the White House, about how he would decide any legal issues. He unequivocally assured me that he had not made any such commitments and he expressed his deep respect for the independence of the judiciary. I also was pleased to learn that Judge Kavanaugh believes, as I do, that Article III of the Constitution was intended to include the concept of precedent and that he sees precedent as much more than simply a matter of practice and tradition. In addition, he expressed agreement with Chief Justice Roberts’ confirmation hearing statement that Roe is settled precedent and entitled to respect under principles of stare decisis. I look forward to Judge Kavanaugh’s public hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on September 4th. As has been my practice, I will continue to review Judge Kavanaugh’s record and will closely follow the hearings before reaching a decision on whether to support the nomination. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Tammy Duckworth (August 21, 2018): “As a woman of color, a mother and a Veteran with a number of pre-existing conditions, I know just how valuable—how life-changing—affordable health care can be,” Duckworth said. “We cannot go back to the old days when women of color were charged more for insurance. We deserve better than a judge who’s already used his power to make it harder for us to access care.” (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 17, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh said that his “five and a half years in the White House — and especially [his] three years as Staff Secretary for President Bush — were the most interesting and in many ways among the most instructive.” The importance of documents related to this time in Judge Kavanaugh’s career is self-evident. I find it troubling that the White House and Judiciary Committee Republicans are stifling transparency rather than working together to provide the necessary documents for the Senate to do its work. The American people deserve the unvarnished truth about Judge Kavanaugh, just as Senate Republicans rightly demanded of President Obama’s nominees. (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 16, 2018): The White House was well aware of Judge Kavanaugh’s lengthy, controversial record as a political operative when the President selected him. But the President selected him nonetheless. Now the burden falls to this Committee to review his record. To date, we are failing miserably...I do not arrive at this conclusion lightly, but this is the most incomplete, most partisan, and least transparent vetting for any Supreme Court nominee I have ever seen. This is especially concerning given that there are questions about whether Judge Kavanaugh was truthful the last time he testified before the Senate, as he provided a misleading account of his work in the Bush White House. We will only know the full truth with his full record. This is what Republicans rightly demanded from Justices Kagan and Sotomayor. And it is what the American people rightly deserve from Judge Kavanaugh. There is still time to get this right. It may mean that the consideration of Judge Kavanaugh does not occur in September. But there is no need to rush. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Johnny Isakson (August 16, 2018): “So that’s why I’m going to vote for Brett Kavanaugh to confirm him to the United States Supreme Court,” Isakson concluded. “He’s a regular guy. He’s a brilliant man. He cares about his country deeply. He believes in his country and feels a responsibility he wants to assume at this time in life. I can’t think of any better reason to vote for him. I’m going to vote for him with pride, and I encourage my fellow senators… to join me as well.” (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 16, 2018): As you know, in 2006, Judge Kavanaugh told the Committee under oath that he was “not aware of any issues” regarding “the legal justifications or the policies relating to the treatment of detainees”; was “not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants”; had nothing to do with issues related to rendition; and was unaware of, and saw no documents related to, the warrantless wiretapping program conducted without congressional authorization. However, at least two documents that are publicly available on the Bush Library website from Judge Kavanaugh’s time as Staff Secretary suggest that he was involved in issues related to torture and rendition after 9/11...In addition, documents that have been produced to the Committee as part of the partisan process that you have brokered with Bill Burck further undercut Judge Kavanaugh’s blanket assertions that he had no involvement in or knowledge of post-9/11 terrorism policies. These documents are currently being withheld from the public at your insistence, but they shed additional light on Judge Kavanaugh’s involvement in these matters and are needed to question him in a public hearing...Whether Judge Kavanaugh misled this Committee in 2006 and his involvement in these White House policies are critically important to our consideration of his fitness for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (August 16, 2018): As you know, in 2006, Judge Kavanaugh told the Committee under oath that he was “not aware of any issues” regarding “the legal justifications or the policies relating to the treatment of detainees”; was “not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants”; had nothing to do with issues related to rendition; and was unaware of, and saw no documents related to, the warrantless wiretapping program conducted without congressional authorization. However, at least two documents that are publicly available on the Bush Library website from Judge Kavanaugh’s time as Staff Secretary suggest that he was involved in issues related to torture and rendition after 9/11...In addition, documents that have been produced to the Committee as part of the partisan process that you have brokered with Bill Burck further undercut Judge Kavanaugh’s blanket assertions that he had no involvement in or knowledge of post-9/11 terrorism policies. These documents are currently being withheld from the public at your insistence, but they shed additional light on Judge Kavanaugh’s involvement in these matters and are needed to question him in a public hearing...Whether Judge Kavanaugh misled this Committee in 2006 and his involvement in these White House policies are critically important to our consideration of his fitness for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. (senate.gov)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (August 16, 2018): As you know, in 2006, Judge Kavanaugh told the Committee under oath that he was “not aware of any issues” regarding “the legal justifications or the policies relating to the treatment of detainees”; was “not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants”; had nothing to do with issues related to rendition; and was unaware of, and saw no documents related to, the warrantless wiretapping program conducted without congressional authorization. However, at least two documents that are publicly available on the Bush Library website from Judge Kavanaugh’s time as Staff Secretary suggest that he was involved in issues related to torture and rendition after 9/11...In addition, documents that have been produced to the Committee as part of the partisan process that you have brokered with Bill Burck further undercut Judge Kavanaugh’s blanket assertions that he had no involvement in or knowledge of post-9/11 terrorism policies. These documents are currently being withheld from the public at your insistence, but they shed additional light on Judge Kavanaugh’s involvement in these matters and are needed to question him in a public hearing...Whether Judge Kavanaugh misled this Committee in 2006 and his involvement in these White House policies are critically important to our consideration of his fitness for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Ron Johnson (August 15, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh’s impressive legal background combined with his compelling personal history makes his nomination an easy one to support. Most importantly, as I have reviewed his judicial record I am confident of his intent to apply the law as a judge, not alter it as a super-legislator. I look forward to voting to confirm his nomination to the Supreme Court once the Senate has thoroughly but expeditiously completed the confirmation process. (senate.gov)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (August 15, 2018): Today, Judge Kavanaugh and I had a thorough and substantive discussion about the importance of the rule of law, precedent, ethical standards at the U.S. Supreme Court, reaching more consensus on the Court, and avoiding activism from the bench so the Court is shielded from politics. I learned more about his judicial record and temperament – which will also hopefully become clearer during his Senate hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee. I reinforced to him how critical it is that anyone who serves on the U.S. Supreme Court is pragmatic, compassionate, committed to justice, and impartial so that everyone before the Court gets a fair hearing. I also talked about the need to fully understand Indian law and treaties, which are particularly important for states like North Dakota. Many special interest groups and members of Congress have stated their opinions on how I should vote. They did so before I’ve been able to do my job of fully considering this nominee. Before making a decision, I needed to meet with Judge Kavanaugh, as I did today, and I will closely study his answers at his Senate hearing. I'll also continue reviewing his record. North Dakotans expect more of their elected officials than partisan judgements. Politics should not be part of the vetting process or the decision-making process. Determining who should serve on the U.S. Supreme Court is too important. (senate.gov)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (August 15, 2018): I had a wide-ranging conversation and productive meeting with Judge Kavanaugh. This was an important opportunity to sit down and talk in-depth with Judge Kavanaugh about: his record; experience working in the Bush Administration and serving on the federal bench; and views on the role of the Supreme Court as well as on a range of issues including precedent, health care, and judicial independence. I take my responsibility as Senator to consider Supreme Court nominees very seriously and will continue a thorough review of Judge Kavanaugh’s record and plan to follow his Senate Judiciary Committee hearing closely. Hoosiers rightly expect careful and thoughtful consideration of a nomination to our nation’s highest court, and I plan to keep doing my homework and make a decision sometime after Kavanaugh’s committee confirmation hearing. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Chris Van Hollen (August 15, 2018): Even though he opposed Judge Kavanaugh, Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), who is leading the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm this cycle, isn’t pushing his colleagues to stand together, which they would need to do to block the nomination. Instead, he wants them to listen to voters. “I think we should defeat Kavanaugh but that’s my opinion and every senator will have to make up his or her own mind,” he said in an interview. (The Wall Street Journal)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (August 14, 2018): Sign my urgent petition demanding the U.S. Senate reject Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court. He is a fundamental threat to our justice and equality as Americans — and this rushed confirmation process is alarming and unfair to the public. (Fundraising email)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (August 14, 2018): "I want to get a sense of who he is as a person," Heitkamp told CNN in an interview Tuesday in Bismarck, North Dakota ahead of the meeting with Kavanaugh. "You aren't going to get him to answer questions on, 'what if this case came in front of you?' I tell people who say, 'well, he is going to do this,' I say, 'number one, you never know that someone is going to do.' I mean, look at the Burger court. No one would have predicted that they made the decision that they made. The single most important thing for me is somebody who approaches ever case with a completely open mind." (CNN)

Likely No Catherine Cortez Masto (August 10, 2018): Cortez Masto says she plans to meet with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh but it likely won't be until after his confirmation hearing in September. She said she's still reviewing his opinions in cases. But from what she's seen so far, she has concerns about his interpretations of issues regarding abortion rights, worker's rights, net neutrality and LGBTQ rights. She said she wants the Supreme Court to be balanced and noted that Trump's last nominee, Justice Neil Gorsuch, declined to meet with her. (Miami Herald)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 10, 2018): The Judiciary Committee and the American people should have access to the full range of documents regarding Brett Kavanaugh, just as they did for the nomination of Elena Kagan. Chairman Grassley and Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, however, decided that the documents cherry-picked by Judge Kavanaugh’s own deputy in the White House are sufficient and have scheduled a hearing on September 4 in order to rush his nomination through. These are the same people who stonewalled President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee for over a year in order to place Neil Gorsuch – an ideologically-driven conservative vetted and supported by the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation – on the Court. They are trying to do this again with Judge Kavanaugh. They have no shame. (senate.gov)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (August 10, 2018): “This is unprecedented and unfair to the American people. Senate Republicans want to wrap up Judge Kavanaugh’s hearing before the National Archives releases documents--which Republicans themselves requested--about the work Kavanaugh did in the White House. These documents may bear directly on the credibility of Judge Kavanaugh’s sworn testimony, not to mention his legal views and temperament. The American people deserve to know the true story of the man seeking a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. Yet it’s clear there are things in Judge Kavanaugh’s White House record that Senate Republicans do not want the American people to see. What are they hiding?” (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 10, 2018): There are so many things wrong with the Judiciary Committee’s vetting of Judge Kavanaugh that it is hard to know where to begin. The review of his record has gone from being shameful to an outright sham. The nonpartisan National Archives cannot complete its review of the limited documents requested by Chairman Grassley until October. This does not even include any of the millions of records from Judge Kavanaugh’s three contentious years as White House Staff Secretary. Now, Chairman Grassley is sidelining the National Archives altogether and relying on a partisan operative to handpick what documents the American people will get to see — a hyper-conflicted lawyer who reported directly to Judge Kavanaugh in the Bush White House and who also happens to represent Steve Bannon, Reince Priebus, and White House Counsel Don McGahn in the Russia investigation. Unlike the transparent process outlined by the Presidential Records Act, which has been used for every nominee since Watergate, there will be no unbiased review or accountability to the American people. This will mark the most partisan and least transparent vetting of a Supreme Court nominee in modern history. Democrats have been repeatedly asking what Senate Republicans are trying to hide in Judge Kavanaugh’s record. Now Republicans are ensuring the American people will not find out. This is incompatible with our constitutional obligation to provide informed consent.This isn’t a vetting, it is an attempted coronation. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (August 8, 2018): “While I remain hopeful the Archivist will reverse course and provide the documents we’ve requested, I’m joining this additional request for documents under the Freedom of Information Act because it may be the only way to get the records we need to fully vet Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination,” said Feinstein. “It’s unacceptable for the Senate to consider someone for the Supreme Court without reviewing that individual’s full record. If the Trump administration and Bush lawyers have access to all Kavanaugh documents, the Senate and the American people should as well.” (senate.gov)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (August 8, 2018): “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.” (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (August 8, 2018): “I have been here for 19 Supreme Court nominations. Yet I’ve never seen the Senate forced to rely on FOIA to fulfill its constitutional duty of providing advice and informed consent to a President’s nominee. But Senate Republicans’ shortsighted decision to turn a blind eye on three controversial and formative years of Judge Kavanaugh’s career leaves us no choice. The American people deserve to know the unvarnished truth about a nominee who, if confirmed, will shape their lives for a generation or longer. Transparency shouldn’t be a partisan issue,” Leahy said. “But if Senate Republicans insist on keeping the American people in the dark about Judge Kavanaugh, it falls upon Democratic senators to use every tool at our disposal, including FOIA, to shine a light on his record.” (senate.gov)

Unknown Doug Jones (August 8, 2018): Sen. Doug Jones said Wednesday he won't let the pressure from both sides of the political spectrum factor into his decision on whether to approve Brett Kavanaugh for the U.S. Supreme Court..."The issue for me is simply that I am going to do what I think. I'm doing my homework. I'm going to do everything I can. I'm working on the Brett Kavanuagh thing, I know there's a lot of interest in that. I haven't made up my mind yet. It could go either way, I don't know," Jones told the Birmingham Rotary Club at the Harbert Center. "Because I believe that the Senate of the United States has a shared responsibility for Supreme Court nominations. It's an independent, shared responsibility with the president. Frankly, advice and consent has been ceded. The president didn't need advice from the Senate before he did this, but he needs our consent. Well, that not my job to just rubber stamp, me or anybody else." After his speech, Jones said he was looking at Kavanaugh's speeches, opinions and writings, and said at a town hall in Hoover late last month that he was also looking through Kavanaugh's record to get a sense of his judicial philosophy. "He's got a large body of work," Jones told the Rotary Club of Kavanaugh, who aside from being a D.C. Circuit Court Judge also served as President George W. Bush's staff secretary. "At the end of the day, I'm going to make a decision one way or the other that I'm going to live with and justify to you, whether you agree with it or not."...With Kavanaugh up for a lifetime appointment, Jones said the Senate does not have to be hasty with the nomination. "This is not something that needs to be rushed. If it is something that could have and should be rushed, then we could have had Merrick Garland on the bench two years ago," he said. (AL.com)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 8, 2018): Hirono has other concerns about Kavanaugh, too. She’s worried how he would rule on women’s reproductive rights ― he once argued that it would be an undue burden on Catholic employers to fill out a form saying they did not want employees to get contraceptive coverage ― and on challenges to the Affordable Care Act. She said he also has a pattern of narrowly interpreting laws that regulate clean air and water. The amount of preparation she’s doing for the Supreme Court hearing was evident by the four large binders on her desk, each full of hundreds of pages of records on Kavanaugh. She’s got tabs on dozens of pages and notes scribbled throughout. She started flipping through one of the binders to show all the notes she’s been taking. “What?? What the heck is that?” reads one message she wrote to herself. Another page had a pink sticky note with one word on it: “What?!” Hirono knows it is unlikely that Democrats can stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Republicans are in the majority, and red-state Democrats up for re-election in November may end up supporting him. But she said it’s crucial that Democrats put up a big fight, if only to remind the public what they stand for. “There are some battles that are worth fighting, regardless of the outcomes,” said Hirono. “I’m hopeful the people in our country will realize these judges who are appointed for life are going to make decisions that affect their life every single day ― and that this is the lasting legacy of Trump.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 8/8/2018.) (Huffington Post)

Unknown Claire McCaskill (August 8, 2018): The two-term Missouri Democrat said she had three topics of discussion for her meeting with Judge Brett Kavanaugh, set for Tuesday: money in politics, consumer protections in health care, and business consolidation. “I want to make sure Judge Kavanaugh has a feel for the little guy who is taking on Goliath.” As a senator in a state President Trump won by 19 points, Ms. McCaskill summed up her vote on his nomination as “damned if you do and damned if you don’t.”...“I believe no one should make a decision on any Supreme Court nominee without taking the time to read the decisions, study the issues and meeting with the nominee,” she said. “I disagree with my colleagues who just immediately out of the gate said no.” (The Wall Street Journal)

Likely No Sheldon Whitehouse (August 8, 2018): “When Democratic senators have to resort to a government transparency statute to get the information needed to carry out our constitutional advice-and-consent duties, it means that Republican senators really don't want Americans to see what's in Kavanaugh’s files,” said Whitehouse. “As he proved with his brazen blockade of President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, Senator McConnell will trash the rulebook to get his guy on the court.” (senate.gov)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (August 8, 2018): “The American people expect the Senate Judiciary Committee to carefully review Judge Kavanaugh’s complete record before considering approving him for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the nation,” said Durbin. “The refusal by Senate Republicans to even follow their own rules on disclosure of critical documents reflecting Judge Kavanaugh’s views, character, and temperament raises serious questions about concealment. The people of this nation deserve honesty and transparency in filling this historic vacancy on the Supreme Court, and that is what our request today is aiming to accomplish.” (senate.gov)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (August 8, 2018): She said the “big topic” at this time is the review of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. She said it will take some time before she weighs in. “The reality is nothing is going to happen in August because the documentation from this nominee is so voluminous the committee is not going to be able to schedule hearings until they get the documents they’ve requested,” she said. The Republicans on the committee have requested some 900,000 pages of material from Kavanaugh’s 12 years on the bench and his years in the George W. Bush administration. “I’m going to be visiting Kavanaugh some time in mid-August,” Murkowski said. “I’ve actually said I want to do a little studying of this person before I sit down with him. I want to be able to ask informed questions to him. I want to do my due-diligence. I’ll tell you, I’ve gotten heat from both sides on this. Some people are like, ‘you need to say no yesterday.’ ... Others are saying, ‘you need to support Trump’s person yesterday.’ So as they say, the proverbial, damned if you do, damned if you don’t. I will be guilty of taking my time to do my homework on this. I solicit your opinions on this, I respect them and I will take them with me as I’m collecting these from around the state.” But, she said: “There are many more weeks to go before you’ll hear me weigh in one way or another on Judge Kavanaugh.” (Daily Sitka Sentinel)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 8, 2018): “Chairman Grassley's shameful, partisan decision to keep us from examining Brett Kavanaugh's full record leaves us with no alternative but to make a Freedom of Information Act request for the release of the same types of materials that were released for past nominees. The U.S. Senate and the American people deserve to see what Judge Kavanaugh wrote and said about important policy matters, including torture, health care, reproductive rights, environmental regulation, workers’ rights, and more while he served as George W. Bush’s right hand man,” said Hirono. (senate.gov)

Likely No Christopher A. Coons (August 8, 2018): “No Senator should vote on a Supreme Court nominee without reviewing his or her full record. This should not be a partisan issue,” said Coons. “I’m disappointed that Republicans are standing in the way of basic transparency about a nominee for a lifetime position on our highest court. There is no good reason for it, and it undermines our institutions.” (senate.gov)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (August 8, 2018): “The next member of the Supreme Court will make decisions that will affect the lives of people across the country, potentially determining whether health insurers can deny coverage to people who are sick or have a pre-existing condition and whether women’s rights are protected,” said Klobuchar. “The American people deserve to have all the facts, and that means the Senate must be able to thoroughly review his record and have the full range of documents available to examine.” (senate.gov)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (August 6, 2018): News 18 reached out to Donnelly's office for comment. They say, “Senator Joe Donnelly has consistently said he would carefully review Judge Kavanaugh's record, meet with him, and follow his Senate confirmation hearing. The senator is continuing to thoroughly examine Judge Kavanaugh's record and looks forward to sitting down with him next week.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 8/6/2018.) (WLFI.com)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (August 6, 2018): In an interview Monday with the Tribune editorial board, Heitkamp said she will make no public decision on Kavanaugh's appointment until she has reviewed his record and seen his hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She is scheduled to meet with him on Wednesday. "I don't like making these decisions until I see the actual job interview, which is the committee hearings," Heitkamp said. "As soon as they schedule the committee hearings and we're able to watch the committee hearings, then that'll be the final piece of information that I need to make a decision."..."What I want to know is, is he going to listen to the arguments?" Heitkamp said. "Is he an ideologue to the point where he will not listen to the other side of an argument and make an independent decision based on the facts in front of him?" (WLFI.com)

Unknown Doug Jones (August 3, 2018): I really believe the Constitution is set up in such a way that the Senate has a shared responsibility with the president for judicial nominations, and that’s particularly important for Supreme Court. I think my job is to do an independent review. One of the problems in America I believe we have now is that everybody goes to their corners, and this is a political fight. I see the TV ads and the millions of dollars that are being spent like a political campaign. We’re supposed to have an independent judiciary. That’s why they’re there for life. It’s part of our checks and balances. And I think we’re in a really bad place when this has become political campaigns. So, I’m trying to block those kind of issues out – all of the extraneous stuff and do my due diligence. So we have been gathering information. Brett Kavanaugh has a large body of work, both as a judge and as a member of the Bush administration. I need to look and see as much as I can on that. We’re getting his opinions, his speeches. We’re looking at other records that we’ll be getting from the White House. Frankly, I think we may be rushing this a little bit too much because of the significant number of records. But that’s not my call...As of right now, I plan on waiting to meet with him. I do hope to meet with him, but my view is that I should wait until after the hearing – he has his hearing. I don’t want my meeting with him or any judge to be a meet-and-greet, or to be a photo-op. It needs to be a substantive meeting on questions that I’ve found, that I want to ask him on a variety of issues. So I would like to do that because some of them may be covered in a hearing. I may need a follow-up after that. Ideally, I would meet with him afterward, but we’re waiting to see depending on when that hearing is going to be because I would like to be able to have that hearing, meet with him and then at that point try to do whatever I need to do to make my decision. (YouTube)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (August 3, 2018): The senator told the Tribune he is “following a process” that includes examining over 300 cases decided by Kavanaugh and each of the judge’s law review articles. Donnelly will then meet with the Supreme Court nominee on Aug. 15. “I’ll be spending time with him to go over all of these areas, and then we have the confirmation hearings as well,” he said. “After we put all of that information together, I’ll make a decision.” “I’m looking for judicial temperament to see how they handle it,” Donnelly added. “I’m looking for qualifications and I’m looking for impartiality. Those are the things I’m looking for.” (Kokomo Tribune)

Likely Yes Charles E. Grassley (August 3, 2018): The best way to determine how a nominee would serve as a justice is to examine how he has served as a judge. Kavanaugh has spent the past 12 years on the powerful U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. During that time, he has written more than 300 opinions and joined hundreds more. These opinions offer ample insight into his legal acumen, temperament and judicial approach...For my part, I’m going to focus on conducting the most thorough and transparent confirmation process of any Supreme Court nominee to date. I invite my Democratic colleagues to set aside election-year posturing and join me in this process. (The Washington Post)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (August 3, 2018): Earlier this week, I joined activists in front of the Capitol to lay out #WhatsAtStake with Brett Kavanaugh's nomination-- a woman's right to choose, laws that defend our safety and the environment, and protections that ensure that millions of Americans can afford health care. (Instagram)

Definitely Yes John Barrasso (August 2, 2018): After meeting with Judge Kavanaugh and closely examining his judicial record, I plan to vote for his confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court. It’s clear Judge Kavanaugh is a mainstream and highly qualified nominee for our highest court. In the conversations I have had with him, he expressed clearly that he understands that his job is to apply the law, not write the law. Judge Kavanaugh has distinguished himself as a careful, independent, and intelligent judge. I look forward to confirming him to the U.S. Supreme Court this fall. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Orrin G. Hatch (August 2, 2018): Of course, reality won’t deter Democrats from further attempts to Bork Judge Kavanaugh. Mother Theresa could be our nominee, and the left would still find something to complain about. Even so, I trust the American people to see through the ruse. Judge Kavanaugh is both a gentleman and a jurist of the highest quality. He is an eminently qualified nominee who deserves swift confirmation to the Supreme Court. (USA Today)

Unknown Doug Jones (August 2, 2018): Jones said Thursday he’s continuing to study Kavanaugh’s record, trying to better understand him. “His judicial philosophy, and whether that is a philosophy vs. an agenda,” Jones said. Much of the pressure on the nomination comes down to the conservative push to overturn Roe vs. Wade. But Jones said he’s taking a broader view. “But on specific issues, I’ve really not focused on that as much,” he said. “I certainly don’t want to comment on those at this point.” Jones has plans to check lots of material over the Senate’s August recess. He’s also hopeful Republicans will agree to release more records related to Kavanaugh’s work in President George W. Bush’s administration and while assisting Special Counsel Kenneth Starr’s investigation of President Bill Clinton. “I want to keep an open mind, and not try to box in any one particular issue.” The U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hasn’t set a hearing date yet. Jones said he expects to meet with the nominee after those hearings, but before a floor vote. (WHNT 19 News)

Definitely Yes John Boozman (August 1, 2018): The first thing that stood out when Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination was announced was his exceptional record on the bench and the high level of respect his peers hold for him. After having an opportunity to visit with him, I find Judge Kavanaugh to be even more impressive than his resume and reputation alone suggest. I am confident that he is a fair and thoughtful jurist who will respect the Constitution and refrain from legislating from the bench. He is the exact type of judge we need on the Supreme Court. I encourage my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to spend some time with Judge Kavanaugh and discuss any concerns they may have with him, rather than spend all their energy attempting to stall and obstruct the confirmation process of this highly-qualified candidate for the Court. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Hoeven (August 1, 2018): I appreciated the opportunity to meet with Judge Kavanaugh today to discuss his judicial philosophy. Having served for more than a decade on the federal appeals court, he is highly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanuagh has a strong record of upholding the law rather than legislating from the bench and his approach to the law shows a deep respect for the Constitution. Given his years of experience on the bench and his commitment to upholding the law, I believe that Judge Kavanaugh is a solid choice for the Supreme Court and I look forward to supporting his confirmation to serve on the Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Tom Cotton (August 1, 2018): I had an excellent meeting with Judge Kavanaugh today. We spoke at length about his jurisprudence, which I've reviewed over the last month, and how he sees the Supreme Court's role in our constitutional democracy. He stressed that judges should not impose their personal views on the public but instead apply the law as written. He has a long and impressive record of public service from his time on the D.C. Circuit, and it's clear he has the character and judgement to serve in this very important post. I look forward to supporting his nomination. (Twitter)

Unknown Doug Jones (August 1, 2018): Dem AL Sen Jones on ad campaigns for/against Kavanaugh: Why is someone advertising they want him confirmed? Why is someone advertising they don’t want him confirmed?..There’s an agenda there..you’re either for the President or you’re not. I'm not here to be a rubber-stamp...Dem AL Sen Doug Jones on if he'd vote for Kavanaugh: I’m prepared to vote for a conservative justice…The question is whether I’m prepared to vote for this justice..I don’t know how I’m going to vote either way (Twitter)

Definitely Yes John Thune (August 1, 2018): After today’s meeting with Judge Kavanaugh, I am confident that the president’s nominee has exactly what it takes to defend the Constitution and call balls and strikes from the bench, which will serve the American people well now and for many years to come. Over the course of his judicial career, he has effectively demonstrated his commitment to deciding cases based on the law, not on his own political opinions or preferred outcomes. With that in mind, I will support his nomination to the Supreme Court this fall, and I hope my colleagues, Republican and Democrat, reach the same conclusion about this well-qualified, mainstream jurist. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Roy Blunt (July 31, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh and I had a good discussion about his judicial philosophy and how it would guide his decision-making process on the Supreme Court. Based on our conversation, along with his outstanding judicial record and legal background, I believe Judge Kavanaugh is the right choice to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. I look forward to supporting his nomination as the confirmation process moves forward. (senate.gov)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 30, 2018): After his meeting, Manchin told reporters he still wanted to read more about Kavanaugh as well as see him in his confirmation hearing, which has been scheduled for September 4 in the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I've told him, my thing is now is what until he has his Judiciary hearing. When the hearing is over, I will want to call him back in to sit down and go over basically what we heard today. What we have looked into in more detail and also seen what he said to the Judiciary hearing to see if there's anything we need clarification on," Manchin said after his meeting. (CNN)

Definitely Yes Richard C. Shelby (July 30, 2018): “After speaking with Judge Brett Kavanaugh, I am confident that he is principled, intelligent, and a steadfast supporter of the rule of law,” said Senator Shelby. “He is highly-qualified for this role and exhibits strong, conservative values and an unwavering commitment to our Constitution. I have no doubt that Judge Kavanaugh will uphold the principles on which our nation was founded. “Confirming Judge Kavanaugh is one of the most important things we will do during this Congress. I look forward to supporting his nomination to serve on our nation’s highest court, and I urge my colleagues to do the same,” Shelby continued. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Rand Paul (July 30, 2018): After meeting Judge Kavanaugh and reviewing his record, I have decided to support his nomination. No one will ever completely agree with a nominee (unless of course, you are the nominee). Each nominee however, must be judged on the totality of their views character and opinions...Judge Kavanaugh will have my support and my vote to confirm him to the Supreme Court. (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (July 30, 2018): “And know that I, too, do not want to turn back the clock when it comes to women’s reproductive rights,” Murkowski said. “I do not want to see Roe v. Wade overturned.”...Murkowski said she’s reading up on Brett Kavanaugh to prepare for her meeting with him, so she can form her own opinion. Her impressions so far? Murkowski said he’s a learned man and a good writer. (Alaska Public Media)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 30, 2018): Today, Judge Kavanaugh and I had a productive meeting and talked about his experience, record and a variety of issues that will impact West Virginians, including his views on healthcare. The Supreme Court may ultimately decide the fate of pre-existing conditions protections for nearly 800,000 West Virginians and will personally impact everyone who knows somebody with a pre-existing condition. Right now, there is a pending lawsuit in federal court brought by 20 state Attorneys General, including the Attorney General of West Virginia, which would allow insurance companies to once again deny coverage to West Virginians with pre-existing conditions. As the Senator from West Virginia, I have a constitutional responsibility to advise and consent on a nominee to fill Supreme Court vacancies and I take that responsibility seriously. I think it’s irresponsible to announce your position minutes after the nominee is announced. I will not make a final decision on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination until I complete a thorough and fair examination of his candidacy in order to decide whether he should hold the position of Associate Justice on the highest court in the land, just as I did with Neil Gorsuch. (senate.gov)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (July 29, 2018): And now that Trump has nominated another far-right conservative to the Supreme Court, I'm fighting -- again -- for a woman's right to choose what she does with her body. We will not go back to the days when women struggled to access abortion and reproductive health care. Every day I go to work to defend the voices that Donald Trump and his administration want to blot out, and I need you to join me in that fight... (Democratic Party fundraising email)

Unknown Doug Jones (July 27, 2018): U.S. Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama said he is keeping an “open mind” on President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and is not worried about a flurry of advertising pressuring him to confirm or reject the nominee. The Democratic senator told reporters Friday evening that he wants to do his “due diligence” on Kavanaugh’s work. “I want to keep an open mind on every aspect of it and look at a number of different things,” Jones said. Jones said the one concern he has is getting documents out of the White House. Democrats have asked to see records from Kavanaugh’s time there as White House staff secretary to President George W. Bush. With past nominees, everything was “turned over” unless there was a technical reason that it should be privileged, Jones said. “We need the information out of the White House,” Jones said. “We didn’t nominate him. The President did. He nominated him with a full knowing of his background. I would like to see them just say, ‘Look, OK, we will get this to you.’” (ALToday.com)

Unknown Susan Collins (July 27, 2018): I'm going to apply, and I am applying, the same standards that I've applied to the previous five Supreme Court nominees that I've been called to vote on...And what I've been doing is I've been meeting every other day in my office with a group of my staff, with a law professor who used to work for me who calls in, and other people, and I'm going over Judge Kavanaugh's record. And it's voluminous, so it's taking a long time. And I will then have, once I'm prepared, I'll have a one-on-one, hour-long meeting with him, where I'll grill him on a lot of issues that I really care about. And then I'll wait for his hearing, because you never know what's going to come up at a hearing that goes several days of questioning. And then I'll make my decision. (News Center Maine)

Definitely No Ron Wyden (July 27, 2018): U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Maria Cantwell on Friday warned that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh could roll back protections for people with preexisting conditions. “We’re faced with the very real threat of going backward,” Wyden, a Democrat and the senior Oregon senator said at a news conference at Oregon Health & Science University. “We feel very strongly that if you’re going to try to do it through the back door, through the judicial system, by putting a hostile new judge on the Supreme Court, we’re going to fight it.”...“If you battle depression, this nomination threatens your health,” Wyden said. “If you have given birth to a child, this nomination threatens your care ... We think senators are going to find it impossible to defend Judge Kavanaugh’s hostility to this act.” (Portland Business Journal)

Likely No Maria Cantwell (July 27, 2018): U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Maria Cantwell on Friday warned that President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh could roll back protections for people with preexisting conditions...An estimated 130 million have preexisting conditions, from asthma to diabetes to cancer. Before the Affordable Care Act, many would forego care out of fear they would be denied coverage or their insurance company would raise their rates, said Cantwell, a Democrat from Washington. “Emergency rooms were flooded with people who couldn’t pay their medical bills,” Cantwell said. “Even if you have employer-sponsored health care, if this law is struck down, insurers could go back and say your medical history is a reason for you to pay more.” (Portland Business Journal)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (July 26, 2018): 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)

Definitely Yes James M. Inhofe (July 26, 2018): Having the opportunity to meet with Judge Kavanaugh today solidified what I already knew—he is a superb choice for the Supreme Court of the United States. More than a decade of interpreting the law on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has given him the experience necessary to honorably serve as a Supreme Court justice for decades to come. The future of my 20 kids and grandkids underscores the importance of confirming good, conservative judges who value and uphold the Constitution. Judge Kavanaugh will serve America well and I look forward to his confirmation. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Cory Gardner (July 26, 2018): Today I was able to meet with Judge Kavanaugh – clearly he is a well-qualified judge who has incredible experience in the federal courts. We had a long conversation about the role of precedent and how a judge should perform on the bench. It’s not about personal opinion, it’s not about personal biases or policy preferences, it’s about looking at the law and ruling on the law and where the law takes you. We had a good conversation about how he would be on the Supreme Court. It was a very good meeting and I think he will make an incredible Supreme Court Justice. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Pat Roberts (July 26, 2018): Judge #Kavanaugh has a great legal mind and a solid reputation. After meeting with him today, I am confident he will uphold the values of the Constitution to the highest standard. I will support his nomination to the #SCOTUS (Twitter)

Likely Yes Lamar Alexander (July 26, 2018): In 2006, I voted for Judge Kavanaugh to serve on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals because he impressed me with his intelligence, temperament and experience. He is committed to deciding cases based upon the law and not his own point of view. The Senate is fortunate to have someone of his caliber to consider. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Tim Scott (July 25, 2018): Approving a Supreme Court nominee is one of the most vital responsibilities of the United States Senate. Ensuring the confirmation of a fair and balanced jurist whom is committed to the rule of law is of the utmost importance. After reviewing his record over the past few weeks, and in meeting with Judge Brett Kavanaugh today, I am certain that he is devoted to these principles and will serve as a fantastic addition to the Supreme Court. He is truly what a 21st century conservative looks like, and I look forward to voting for him this fall. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Cindy Hyde-Smith (July 25, 2018): I thoroughly enjoyed meeting Judge Kavanaugh. His qualifications are excellent, and he has a genuine concern for our country, and for upholding the Constitution and rule of law. I firmly believe the President made a great decision in nominating Judge Kavanaugh. I’m excited about his nomination, and look forward to supporting him and being an advocate for his confirmation. Mississippians will be proud to have him serve on the Court. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes John Barrasso (July 25, 2018): I had a great opportunity to meet with Judge Kavanaugh. He was terrific. We talked about the separation of powers, the three branches of government and the role of a justice, which is to apply the law, not to try and rewrite the law. We talked about his time as a clerk on the court and his knowledge and understanding of the issues that face our country and what happens when the government tries to overreach. It was a very productive visit, I’m very impressed and I’m looking forward to the hearings in the Senate. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Joni Ernst (July 25, 2018): Mr. President, I rise today to voice my support for the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court of the United States...I am especially impressed by Judge Kavanaugh's interpretation of the Constitution as it applies to the ever-encroaching power of federal agencies. (YouTube)

Likely Yes Bill Cassidy (July 25, 2018): I appreciate Judge Kavanaugh coming by. We talked about his views on the role of the judiciary, original intent, the importance of interpreting the Constitution as written, separate from personal views. Judge Kavanaugh is clearly well qualified—respected by Republicans and Democrats in the legal community. I’m looking forward to the Senate confirmation process this fall and I anticipate that Judge Kavanaugh will be confirmed. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Christopher S. Murphy (July 24, 2018): These are the stakes as we prepare to vote on Judge Kavanaugh's nomination, and it is all in service of this very intentional, very deliberate, very planful campaign of sabotage. A year ago this Saturday, the American people got their way and this body decided not to repeal the Affordable Care Act because people liked the fact that 20 million people have insurance, people liked the fact that people with preexisting conditions are protected. That night the American people got their way, but since then, the president and this Congress have been working to undermine it. And the next step in that plan is the elevation of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. It's important for us to come down to the floor and explain what the stakes are. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Elizabeth Warren (July 24, 2018): Warren similarly urged senators to reject Kavanaugh’s nomination. “It is not enough to have a good heart … we are called to act,” Warren said. ”We are on the moral side of history.” (The Hill)

Unknown Susan Collins (July 24, 2018): Collins on Tuesday told reporters that she was still reviewing Kavanaugh’s extensive archive of writings before setting a date for a meeting. “It’s not going to be any time immediately because I still have a ton of work to do on his decisions, his law review articles, a lot of others,” she said. “I’m still going through his very voluminous 300 decisions and speeches before AEI, for example. There’s a very interesting speech he gave there.” In the September AEI speech that Collins referenced, Kavanaugh expressed effusive admiration for the work of former Chief Justice William Rehnquist — including his dissent in the landmark Roe v. Wade decision that guaranteed a woman’s right to an abortion. (Vox)

Definitely Yes John Cornyn (July 24, 2018): I'd say that [his] words and the opinions of his many supporters demonstrate Judge Kavanaugh is the right person to replace Justice Kennedy on the Supreme Court. (YouTube)

Likely No Christopher A. Coons (July 24, 2018): But I first want there to be an agreement about the release of the documents relating to his five years of service in the Bush administration and his time serving with Judge Starr's independent counsel team. He has a very long and detailed record. Much of it public, his decisions as a member of the D.C. Circuit Court, but much of it is not, his work at the highest levels of the Bush administration. And as we saw just last Thursday, there have been Trump nominees for senior judicial positions, who once we really know the full extent of their record, even Republicans failed to support...Of course I will meet with Judge Kavanaugh. I think we need to have an agreement in place first about the production of the documents necessary for any senator, in particular a senator on the Judiciary Committee, to begin the laborious process of digging through his whole record, so that I can ask questions that are well-informed, at his confirmation hearing, and in a personal meeting. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Cory Booker (July 24, 2018): Booker, speaking at a press conference with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and religious and moral leaders, said that Kavanaugh’s nomination “has nothing to do with politics” but with “who we are as moral beings.” “I’m here to call on folks to understand that in a moral moment, there is no neutral. In a moral moment, there is no bystanders,” he said. “You are either complicit in the evil, you are either contributing to the wrong, or you are fighting against it.” Booker called on senators to reject Kavanaugh, saying that his “ancestors said if someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.” (The Hill)

Likely Yes Jeff Flake (July 23, 2018): Jeff Flake says Kavanaugh's comments from '99 questioning the decision in US v. Nixon re: Watergate tapes will "be given a good hearing," but "nothing I've seen so far concerns me as grounds for not confirming him." (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (July 23, 2018): #SCOTUS justices should apply the law in a case, regardless of policy outcome. Judge #Kavanaugh understands that. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Rob Portman (July 23, 2018): Judge Brett Kavanaugh is legal scholar, a judge who respects and adheres to the Constitution, and a good man. I think he’s the type of person we need serving on the Supreme Court of the United States dealing with the tough issues the court will address that affect Ohioans and Americans everywhere. (Troy Daily News)

Definitely Yes Ted Cruz (July 22, 2018): “There’s no doubt that Rand’s concerns about privacy and the Fourth Amendment are longstanding and genuine and existed long before this nomination. And I share many of those concerns,” said Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas). But not when it comes to Kavanaugh, Cruz said: “I think the body of Judge Kavanaugh's work merit confirmation.” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but the article was posted early in the morning of 7/23/2018.) (Politico)

Definitely No Patty Murray (July 21, 2018): I voted against Judge Kavanaugh when he was nominated as a federal judge by George W. Bush, and I strongly oppose his nomination now. I'm calling on all of my Senate colleagues to join me in rejecting him -- but it will take the American people standing together and making our voices heard to win this fight. (Democratic Party fundraising email)

Unknown Rand Paul (July 21, 2018): "I am honestly undecided. I am very concerned about his position on privacy and the Fourth Amendment. This is not a small deal for me. This is a big deal...Kavanaugh’s position is basically that national security trumps privacy. And he said it very strongly and explicitly. And that worries me...[But w]ouldn’t you rather have Kavanaugh than Ruth Bader Ginsburg? He’s probably good on economic liberty and overzealous regulation and things like that. So I don’t want to have it sort of in a vacuum. I’ll have to weigh that versus other aspects that he may be a lot better than a Clinton appointee." (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but the article states they took place sometime during the week preceding 7/23/2018.) (Politico)

Unknown Tim Kaine (July 21, 2018): On Judge Kavanaugh, I'm reading his opinions. I'm scheduling a meeting with him. I'm going to meet with him personally, which Republicans refused to do when Judge Garland was nominated for the court. And then I'm going to watch the judiciary committee hearing. And after that hearing and after I have the opportunity to personally ask him about issues that I think are really important, I'll wait til after the hearing and make up my mind. I'll do it on the merits. (YouTube / PBS News Hour - first U.S. Senate debate in Virginia)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 20, 2018): In constituent town hall on Kavanaugh, Manchin going over nominee's rulings on Obamacare and says he wants to ask him: "Now that the individual mandate has been repealed by the tax law...what’s your opinion on the constitutionality of the ACA?" "I can't give you his answer because I haven't spoken to him yet," Manchin tells constituents. "All my legal minds, their brains are twisting and turning right now." (Twitter)

Definitely No Thomas R. Carper (July 20, 2018): The numbers at this early stage may seem like they’re against us, but in truth, Kavanaugh’s environmental positions stand in stark contrast to what the overwhelming majority of Americans want and what the laws of our land require. When the American people — and the senators who represent them — learn more about Kavanaugh’s record and fully understand what’s at stake, then we have a fighting chance. And it’s a chance we intend to take. (USA Today)

Likely No Catherine Cortez Masto (July 20, 2018): Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nevada, says her mind is not made up yet about the President’s pick to replace the retired Justice Anthony Kennedy on America’s high court. She plans to meet the nominee, Federal Judge Brett Kavanaugh, in the near future. “You know, I want to sit him down and want to see what he has to say -how he responds, if he responds,” Cortez Masto told me Friday by phone from her office in Washington...Cortez Masto says she is studying Kavanaugh’s work. “I am currently going through his opinions, his writing, taking a look at some of his positions that I have concerns about.” One of her principal concerns is how a Kavanaugh on the court would impact women. “We have fought, particularly in the State of Nevada, to make sure that women have a choice when it comes to making decisions about their bodies and their health care. I do not want that to be rolled back. I do not want a judge that is going to come in and take that away,” she told me...The Senator is also examining how the nominee would handle issues of civil rights. “I want somebody who is going to protect the rights of all Americans, not just a few,” she says. (News 3 Las Vegas)

Likely Yes Tim Scott (July 20, 2018): Those freedoms, he said, will be protected by the Supreme Court if Brett Kavanaugh, President Donald Trump’s nomination to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, is confirmed. “Our nation will have a firewall in the Supreme Court that I believe will be there, by God’s grace, to protect the freedoms as our nation battles for the next decade or so (over) what should be the DNA of America,” Scott said. (The Gazette)

Likely Yes Michael B. Enzi (July 19, 2018): It was great to talk with Judge Kavanaugh about his years of experience and dedication to the judicial system. He is an extremely well qualified nominee whose prior rulings and writings demonstrate his commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law. I appreciated his thoughtful answers to my questions and look forward to the Senate’s consideration of his nomination this fall. (Twitter)

Definitely No Ron Wyden (July 19, 2018): I mean, look, we're just getting started. [Kavanaugh] had a long history with the Bush administration. [Sen.] Rand Paul [R-Ky.] has said he's undecided on Kavanaugh because of his privacy views. Sen. Paul and I talk often about these issues. I've pointed out that the Kavanaugh record on liberty questions is right out of the Big Brother playbook. We've got a long way to go on that. (Willamette Week)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (July 19, 2018): But I know that there is a great deal of attention that has been trained on me because primarily of the issue of Roe v. Wade and what will happen when Kennedy, who was viewed as that swing member on the Supreme Court, when he leaves and Judge Kavanaugh were to replace him, what then happens to the balance. And it's not just the balance on women's reproductive issues. There's so many other issues that are certainly a concern for Alaska's constituents. We're a state that believes very, very strongly in ensuring that we're respecting Second Amendment rights, for instance. But trying to identify or distill out and say that there is one issue that for me will guide my determination on this nomination or any future nomination for the United States Supreme Court, that's not how I operate. I have been looking at Judge Kavanaugh and his record holistically, just as I did with every other justice that I've had an opprotunity to weigh in on, whether it was Justice Kagan, or Sotomayor, or Gorsuch, or Judge Roberts. And so I am perhaps taking more time than some would like me to. Some on the right would say, 'You need to be deciding right now that you're gonna be supporting him.' And those on the left would say, 'You need to decide right now that he's just not acceptable.' I don't operate that way. I will take my time. I will be thoughtful. (C-SPAN)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (July 19, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh never replied to a letter I sent him 11 years ago about a misleading answer he gave during Congressional testimony on his involvement in questions about the rules governing detention of combatants during the Bush Administration. Documents pertaining to his time in the Bush White House bear a direct relevancy to a sworn statement he made under oath that has now been disputed. The Senate deserves to see every document related to his time in the Bush White House – the same precedent Elena Kagan was held to by the Judiciary Committee for documents related to her time in the Clinton White House. Let’s not hide the ball, this goes to fundamental questions of transparency and accuracy. (Facebook)

Definitely Yes Dean Heller (July 19, 2018): Today, I had the opportunity to sit down with Judge Brett Kavanaugh to ask him questions about his record, learn more about his judicial philosophy, and discuss his approach to serving on our nation’s highest court. With more than a decade of experience serving on the second most powerful court in the country and as the author of more than 300 opinions, Judge Kavanaugh has an extensive record that reflects a clear respect for precedent. He is a mainstream jurist who has proven that he is dedicated to defending the Constitution and upholding the rule of law – not re-writing it from the bench. His legal career combined with his educational credentials make him an exceptionally qualified nominee to fill the upcoming vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. At this point, I have no reservations in confidently supporting Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Bob Corker (July 19, 2018): “I had a great meeting today with Judge Kavanaugh and think he is a superb nominee,” said Corker. “It is inspiring to me to see someone of his caliber, who has dedicated his life in the fashion that he has, have this opportunity to serve on the Supreme Court. He answered the questions that I asked very clearly, succinctly and professionally, and I don’t think the meeting could have gone any better. I thank him for his desire to serve our country. I will certainly watch Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing, but assuming there are no surprises there, I plan to enthusiastically support his nomination.” (senate.gov)

Definitely No Tammy Duckworth (July 19, 2018): Based on his own words and writing, I fear that Judge Kavanaugh would be the deciding vote in critical cases that restrict a woman's freedom to make health care decisions with her doctor, tear away protections that guarantee Americans with pre-existing conditions may obtain health insurance and empower a President of the United States to act as though he is above the law. Judge Kavanaugh should not be confirmed as the next Supreme Court Justice, and he will not have my vote. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (July 18, 2018): Judge #Kavanaugh truly understands a judge’s and justice’s proper role, and there is no reason why he shouldn’t be confirmed with bipartisan support. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Steve Daines (July 17, 2018): As a U.S. Senator, one of my most significant responsibilities is to critically and thoughtfully evaluate the individuals charged with defending our Constitution and our nation's laws. It is disappointing that many of my Democrat colleagues in the Senate apparently do not feel the same and decided to oppose Judge Kavanaugh's nomination before it was even announced. In our meeting today, I found that Judge Kavanaugh has proven himself to be a well-qualified judge who appreciates the vital role that our Supreme Court holds and understands that it not appropriate for justices to legislate from the bench, but that they must apply the Constitution without regard to the policy outcome they want. I am confident that Judge Kavanaugh will serve well on our nation's highest court and hope that he will receive a fair confirmation hearing. I offer him my full support and my vote. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Todd Young (July 17, 2018): Today, I had the opportunity to sit down with Judge Kavanaugh and discuss a wide range of issues that are important to Hoosiers, including his approach to interpreting the Constitution. Judge Kavanaugh is a good and decent person, a family man, and a well-respected jurist. If confirmed, I have confidence that he will be faithful to the Constitution and preserve the integrity of the Supreme Court. Our discussion today will be very helpful as I continue to review Judge Kavanaugh’s record. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Todd Young (July 17, 2018): Young told the Courier & Press in his office before Tuesday's meeting that he is "very much inclined" to support Kavanaugh, but he has work to do before making a final decision. "I think the president's chosen someone with impeccable credentials and an incredible reputation for faithfully interpreting the Constitution and applying the letter of the Constitution to the facts of the given case," Young said. "I am very much inclined to support a nominee like that." Young added that he still wants to research Kavanaugh's judicial opinions and consult legal experts who know the judge. (Evansville Courier & Press)

Definitely Yes Ted Cruz (July 17, 2018): Despite Senate Democrats’ best efforts to demagogue this nomination, they will be unsuccessful. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I look forward to supporting his nomination, and am confident that the Senate will move swiftly to confirm Judge Kavanaugh in the coming months. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Johnny Isakson (July 17, 2018): My meeting today with Judge Kavanaugh confirmed what constitutional experts, legal scholars and his own clerks have said: He is eminently well-qualified to serve on the Supreme Court and has a strong commitment to our Constitution and the rule of law. Judge Kavanaugh has a strong record of applying the law as it is written without regard to his personal views, which is exactly what a judge should do. I look forward to his testimony before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Bob Corker (July 16, 2018): The politician, who is weighing a run against the president, urged the Foreign Relations Committee chairman to use his procedural leverage in the Senate to halt Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court as payback for Trump’s refusal on Monday to acknowledge Russia’s election meddling. Nothing doing, the retiring senator responded. “Why would I cut off my nose to spite my face?” Corker recounted responding to the pol, whom he declined to name publicly. “I like the Supreme Court nominee. So what the heck?” (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of Sen. Corker's recounting of this story, but it appears to have taken place on or around 7/16/2018.) (Politico)

Likely No Bill Nelson (July 16, 2018): “If you want to stop McConnell's plans to put another right-wing extremist on the Supreme Court, gut affordable health care and dismantle Medicare,” Nelson wrote in a July 16 fundraising email, “you need to give right now to make sure Democrats take back the Senate by winning in Florida.” (Washington Examiner, and confirmed by Tampa Bay Times Washington bureau chief Alex Leary)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 16, 2018): I take my responsibility to advise and consent on a nominee to the Supreme Court very seriously. As I did when Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch were nominated, I am evaluating Judge Kavanaugh’s record, legal qualifications, judicial philosophy and particularly, his views on healthcare. I encourage West Virginians to review his qualifications themselves and share their thoughts and concerns with me. (senate.gov)

Unknown Rand Paul (July 16, 2018): U.S. Sen. Rand Paul said he is “very worried” about Trump’s Supreme Court nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, signaling a potential rocky appointment in the Senate. “I’m worried about his opinion on the Fourth Amendment,” Paul said in Louisville on Monday. “Kavanaugh ruled that national security trumps privacy ... that worries me.”...Overall he said he was “undecided” and added that it could be “a lot worse, it could have been a Clinton appointee.” (13NewsNow.com)

Definitely No Kirsten E. Gillibrand (July 15, 2018): "I'm going to speak out as loudly as I can, [and] I hope that every woman in America speaks out as well…. This is literally the biggest civil rights issue, certainly in my lifetime, for women. We are at the brink of not having reproductive freedom in this country, not having the ability to decide when and how many children we're going to have. This nominee believes that a boss should decide whether I get access to birth control…. We should fight back with everything we have—because everything's at stake...I believe his record is disqualifying." (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 7/15/2018.) (Glamour)

Unknown Rand Paul (July 15, 2018): At this point I'm undecided...I am worried though, and perhaps disappointed, that I think Kavanaugh will cancel out Gorsuch's vote on the fourth amendment...I'm willing to meet with him. I'd like to have a frank discussion with him...I'm concerned about Kavanaugh. We're going to have hopefully an open and long and far-ranging conversation about this. (TV News Archive)

Likely No Richard J. Durbin (July 15, 2018): Durbin has some experience with Judge Brett Kavanaugh. The Democratic senator questioned him at a confirmation hearing more than a decade ago, and says one of his answers was later “in doubt.” Durbin says he wrote by-then Judge Kavanaugh a letter on the discrepancy but never heard back. That said: “I might say that for those who are jumping to the conclusions that they’re for or against him, I am not in that position,” Durbin said. “I have many questions to ask, and we are now assembling the evidence from his public service.” (NPR Illinois)

Definitely No Tammy Baldwin (July 14, 2018): "If you hope that the Supreme Court is going to overturn Citizens United anytime soon, don't hold your breath," she said. "I'm voting no," she declared of the Kavanaugh nomination, "and I'm going to need your help in this fight." (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (July 14, 2018): Ms. Heitkamp is playing her cards close to her vest; she says she will not make a decision until after the hearings. As for her initial impression, she said, “He seems to be a fairly standard conservative judge, and obviously highly qualified.”...Ms. Heitkamp said she would meet with Judge Kavanaugh and “try and get a sense of who he is as a person, because you can never know how people are going to decide cases, in my opinion.” But she appeared unbothered: “I get pressure like this all the time.” (The New York Times)

Unknown Doug Jones (July 14, 2018): "I’ve got thoughts, but I’m not going to say. I want to do my investigative work. ... We’ll go from there...I’m going to do a deep dive of his record and we’ll talk about that record. I’ll make my judgment at that point." (Note: We have not yet confirmed the exact date of these comments, but they appear to have taken place on or around 7/14/2018.) (The Hill)

Definitely No Dianne Feinstein (July 14, 2018): This president has said he would appoint the person that would take down Roe [v. Wade] ... and I take him at his word...I can tell you this: That it is really key and critical that Democrats, including those in difficult states, get the support of our party so that they can do the right thing in this vote...We have five Democratic [senators up for reelection] from states that Donald Trump won [by large margins], and this makes this vote difficult for them. For me, it’s not difficult at all. But I’m the lead Democrat on the committee, and we will put together a kind of message, I hope, for the American people which will enable those Democrats to vote along with us. (Politico)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (July 13, 2018): "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)

Definitely Yes Mitch McConnell (July 13, 2018): I've been trying to find anybody whose known him over the last 20 years who dislikes him and can't find anybody. In short, if you were calling up central casting and said, 'send me the perfect Supreme Court justice' it would be Brett Kavanaugh. (Louisville Courier Journal)

Likely Yes Mike Rounds (July 13, 2018): During his career, he has issued more than 300 opinions, so part of our job in the Senate will be to review them so we can learn more about his decision-making philosophy. The Supreme Court has endorsed Kavanaugh’s opinions more than a dozen times. In some cases, the Supreme Court upheld a D.C. Circuit Court opinion, which he joined, and in other cases, they used his dissenting opinions to overturn D.C. Circuit Court opinion...Some of our Democrat colleagues have demanded that nominees reveal how they would vote in a particular case based on the policy outcome. We believe this is inappropriate. Judges – particularly Supreme Court Justices who have the final say in the law – must be able and willing to put their personal beliefs aside and apply the law as it was written, not as he or she would like it to be. The Constitution clearly laid out that the role of the Supreme Court is to fairly interpret the law that Congress creates. Period. The judiciary must not be politicized. Confirming fair, impartial judges who will adhere to the Constitution is one of our greatest responsibilities in the Senate, and one which I take very seriously. I look forward to a thorough and rigorous confirmation process as we consider the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Christopher S. Murphy (July 13, 2018): Connecticut's two Democratic U.S. senators say they're hopeful there's a chance to block President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh...Sen. Chris Murphy, who's seeking a second term, says the fight is to make sure the court "reflects the values of our nation, reflects the values of our state," including abortion rights and gay marriage. (U.S. News & World Report)

Definitely Yes Roger Wicker (July 13, 2018): Like Justice Neil Gorsuch, whom President Trump appointed last year, Judge Kavanaugh is an outstanding nominee to the High Court. His credentials include more than a decade on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, and his impressive record falls well within the judicial mainstream. I am confident he will be a strong conservative addition to the Supreme Court, diligently protecting the Constitution and the inalienable rights it affords to every American. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Gary Peters (July 13, 2018): The Supreme Court is supposed to protect the fundamental rights of all Americans, and I believe Judge Kavanaugh’s judicial record shows that he will put the needs of special interests and large corporations ahead of the American people. I’m deeply troubled by his efforts to undermine workers’ rights and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which will only further stack the deck against hardworking middle class families who are struggling to make ends meet. His judicial opinions against the Affordable Care Act threaten a woman’s right to control her own health care decisions, and risk limiting health care access for millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions. He has ruled against clean air protections, which risks environmental and public health and undermines our economic competitiveness. Coupled with his dissent in favor of striking down net neutrality, these positions put small businesses that are striving to succeed at a serious disadvantage to wealthy multinational corporations. Families and businesses in Michigan rely on these hard-won rights and protections. Given Judge Kavanaugh’s clear record of placing corporate interests before the rights of Michiganders, I will oppose his nomination. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Debbie Stabenow (July 13, 2018): It is the Senate’s constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination on behalf of the people we represent. After reviewing his record, I believe it is in the best interests of the people of Michigan for me to oppose the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh. (senate.gov)

Likely No Tammy Baldwin (July 12, 2018): The people of Wisconsin need a fair, impartial and independent Supreme Court Justice who will stand up for them, not for powerful special interests. I don’t have confidence that Judge Kavanaugh would be that justice. (Facebook)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (July 12, 2018): “We talked about his judicial philosophy, his commitment to the rule of law and to the text and history of the Constitution. Beyond his judicial philosophy, we talked about what kind of person he is,” Capito said. “I think he is an excellent choice by the president.” (WVMetroNews.com)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (July 12, 2018): After meeting with Judge Kavanaugh today, I’m even more certain that he is a man of integrity and that he understands and respects the responsibilities of a Supreme Court justice, which is why I plan to support his nomination. Judge Kavanaugh and I had a wide-ranging discussion about our separation-of-powers system, the court’s responsibility to properly apply laws passed by Congress to guard against overreach by federal agencies, and the importance of respecting precedent to promote stability in the law. I know Judge Kavanaugh will be an excellent addition to the court and will honor and strengthen this important branch of our democracy. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Mike Rounds (July 12, 2018): It wasn't even so much what he said: it was how he said it -- and the sincerity, the ability to project his sense of humanity, his strong focus on his role as a judge to actually interpret, rather than create, law. It was what a lot of us as conservatives really wanted to hear...and I think as people come forward, and they start looking at it, I would suspect that, if Republicans say they're supportive, I would imagine there are a number of Democrats who would also probably join in...I think a number of them will probably step forward and recognize also that this guy really is an excellent choice for the U.S. Supreme Court. (WNAX.com)

Definitely Yes Dan Sullivan (July 12, 2018): I think Judge Kavanaugh meets the qualifications we should be looking for and I plan on supporting him as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes John Kennedy (July 12, 2018): I like what I see with Judge Kavanaugh. I don't know him well yet. I sit on Judiciary, and it's our job to examine his qualifications and I intend to do my job. I want the same thing for this Supreme Court position as I wanted for the one filled by Justice Gorsuch. I want a cross between Socrates and Dirty Harry. I want a person who is wise, who is open-minded, not afraid to test his assumptions against the arguments of his critics, but I also want somebody who has some self-awareness and has the courage of his convictions. I have lots of questions for Judge Kavanaugh, both about the law and his philosophy of the law. I'd like to know a little bit more about him personally. I'm looking for a judge, I'm not looking for an activist who's going to try and rewrite the Constitution every other Thursday. I want somebody who will follow the law and call the balls and strikes...Let me say it again--I like what I see. I really like what I see. Clearly, Judge Kavanaugh has a brilliant legal mind. But I just want to be sure. This is one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful, unelected positions--it's for life--in the most powerful and important country in human history, America. I want to get this one right. I think he's a good one--it looks like it--but I just want to be sure. It's my job. (710 KEEL)

Likely Yes Ben Sasse (July 12, 2018): The judge I met today doesn't sound anything like the imaginary bogeyman that Democrats are railing against. I think Nebraskans are going to like this humble judge who is clearly most proud of his two daughters. Judge Kavanaugh is a serious thinker and a careful jurist who understands that our system of checks and balances and our First Amendment freedoms make America great. (The Lincoln Journal Star)

Likely Yes Deb Fischer (July 12, 2018): During our meeting today, I asked Judge Kavanaugh several questions about his record and his constitutional interpretation. I was impressed with his talented legal mind, judicial temperament and commitment to the rule of law...[Kavanaugh is] an excellent choice. (The Lincoln Journal Star)

Likely Yes Cory Gardner (July 12, 2018): I expect, I believe [Senators Manchin, Heitkamp, and Donnelly] will vote for Judge Kavanaugh. And why? Not because of politics, well, yes, because of politics, but yes, because Judge Kavanaugh is a good judge, that if you look at his, if you look at his record, which we are getting into, and we will get into more, they’re going to see that you have a judge here who is a judge’s judge who has great respect. I saw a liberal Yale law professor write an op-ed in support of Judge Kavanaugh and his nomination. He’s going to have support from the left and the right. And they’re going to see that here is a judge who’s not going to rule base on personal opinion or biases, but the law. And that’s what we want of any judge on any court. (HughHewitt.com)

Likely Yes Roy Blunt (July 11, 2018): The goal of a judge, in my mind, and I think in the mind of a vast majority of the people I work for, is to judge a case based on, in the case of a federal judge, a Supreme Court judge, the law and the Constitution. To look and be sure those match up and to be sure that the law is applied as it's written, not as a judge thinks it should have been written… and it seems to me that in the Scalia tradition, the Gorsuch nomination tradition, we have a judge here who appears to be committed in every way to look at the law and enforce the law. (senate.gov)

Likely No Catherine Cortez Masto (July 11, 2018): I’m already concerned he came off a list that was put forward by @Heritage & @FedSoc, organizations that I know are looking for judges who are very, very conservative, who they believe would roll back Roe v Wade (Twitter)

Unknown Tim Kaine (July 11, 2018): Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine said that while many of his fellow Democrats have already said they will oppose the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, he has not yet made up his mind how he will vote on the Supreme Court nominee. On Wednesday morning, Kaine told reporters that he has a lot of concerns about Kavanaugh. He said he is particularly worried over the effect the judge could have on abortion rights and abolition of the Affordable Care Act, but Kaine insists he must do a lot of research before he decides how he will vote. 'My goal is to review the record with my staff, interview Judge Kavanaugh in my office. Possibly offer some of those ideas to the judiciary committee members who will be questioning him. Watch that hearing before making a final decision,' said Kaine[.] He says he would like to see the Senate wait until after the midterm elections to vote on Kavanaugh's nomination. (WSLS)

Likely Yes Michael D. Crapo (July 11, 2018): After meeting Judge Kavanaugh in person, I am more convinced than ever he deserves a full review of his record so that the American people will know his background & character. I look forward to him coming before @senjudiciary to speak about his experience & knowledge more deeply (Twitter)

Likely Yes Charles E. Grassley (July 11, 2018): I've been following him on the DC Circuit Court, and he's been pretty much a person that believes in the Constitution as basic law and something to protect the people from their government. (KIOW)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (July 11, 2018): When I consider nominees for the Supreme Court, I don’t look for a person who promises a particular policy outcome or someone who is out to actually create laws. What I look for is a person whose record reflects experience, fairness, and respect for the Constitution as it is written. President Trump made clear in his campaign that he would appoint judges with respect for the Constitution. I believe he kept his commitment when he nominated Brett Kavanaugh to become a Supreme Court justice. (senate.gov)

Likely No Jeanne Shaheen (July 11, 2018): Well, as you know, Judge Kavanaugh has a long record of 12 years on the D.C. Circuit. He's done a lot of writings during that time. I think we're just beginning to find out what's in some of those. Before that he was a political operative. He worked in the Bush White House. He was involved with Ken Starr in that investigation. He was involved with the Elian Gonzalez situation. So he has a lot in his history that I'm interested in seeing more about and seeing where he has stood on certain issues. I am troubled by his opposition to health care, to the Affordable Care Act. I'm troubled by his -- what I expect to be his stance on women's reproductive freedom. So there are a lot of questions that I want to ask him. But I think we need to have a full process where we have a chance to listen to what this nominee has to say, to learn about his record, and then to make a decision. I think we need to go back to the days when people tried to look at nominees and see who -- whether they really are mainstream, whether they really can respect the precedent that's in the Constitution -- or in the Supreme Court decisions, and really uphold as Judge Kavanaugh said he wanted to do, the Constitution. (CNN)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 11, 2018): No I don’t have a lean [on how I will vote]. I think he seems to be a very fine person of high moral standards. A family person who’s very involved in his community. Has all the right qualities. He’s well-educated. And with that, you know, we have to just look at making sure that the rule of law and the Constitution is going to be followed ... I’ll be hearing from West Virginians and their opinion. And I think they have, also, a right. And that’s who I work for. They’re my boss. And we want to hear from them, too, during this process. (YouTube)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (July 10, 2018): I've been asked already this morning by several different reporters, 'What do you think? What do you think?' And I am certainly going to defer on that until I have had an opportunity to review, and this is an individual that has a pretty extensive record out there. He's been on the bench since 2006. He's been in the administration before that. So there is a lot to go through. (The Anchorage Daily News)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (July 10, 2018): I work for the people of Indiana and I want them to have a voice in this ... People have said 'do you feel pressure?' and I don't ... When I spoke with Justice Gorsuch, when I reviewed his writings, when I reviewed his court decisions, I became comfortable he wasn't extreme one way or the other. (WNDU)

Likely Yes Michael B. Enzi (July 10, 2018): I appreciate President Trump acting quickly to nominate Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the seat vacated by Justice Anthony Kennedy. The chance to serve on the highest court in the land is a great honor bestowed with incredible responsibility. I am excited to once again review Judge Kavanaugh’s qualifications and record to ensure they demonstrate his commitment to the rule of law. I support Senate Leader Mitch McConnell’s commitment to upholding Senate precedent and following regular order, with an expected vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination this fall. (senate.gov)

Unknown Susan Collins (July 10, 2018): “When you look at the credentials that Judge Kavanaugh brings to the job, it’ll be very difficult for anyone to argue that he’s not qualified for the job. He clearly is qualified for the job,” Collins told reporters on Tuesday when asked whether she faced an easier decision with Kavanaugh than Judge Amy Comey Barrett, who was on the president’s short list and is seen as more hostile to reproductive rights. The moderate GOP senator added, however, that she would take into consideration “other issues involving judicial temperament and his judicial philosophy” before making a final decision. (The Huffington Post)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 10, 2018): “I thought he came across as a good family person, good, decent human being,” Mr. Manchin said of his initial reaction to Judge Kavanaugh. But he said he would not be making a hasty decision about a Supreme Court appointment mere hours after the announcement, noting his concern about Judge Kavanaugh’s views of the Affordable Care Act given the “lives at stake” in West Virginia. (The New York Times)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (July 10, 2018): The concern I have about his appointment and him being on the United States Supreme Court is that we already know that there are probably 20 states that are prepared and have been in the process of restricting a woman's right to make that decision in terms of giving her meaningful access to not only reproductive health care, but also to an abortion. And my concern is that those cases will then be appealed up to the United States Supreme Court, and he, being the swing vote on that court, will consistently uphold these restrictions on a woman's meaningful access to reproductive care, and, in effect, then, can overturn Roe v. Wade without explicitly overturning Roe v. Wade, in that affirming these state laws, these restrictions on a woman's access to reproductive health care, they will essentially eliminate a woman's ability to have an abortion if she makes the decision that that is necessary. (PBS News Hour)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (July 10, 2018): The burden of the proof is on him, which means that I am leaning no but maybe he can convince me to vote for him. This is a big burden on him to show me he can be fair and objective. (CNN)

Definitely Yes Jon Kyl (July 10, 2018): When reached via email on Tuesday, Kyl said that he's busy with the confirmation process. "Prospects excellent. I just help out," Kyl wrote. "Introduce him to Senators, follow up, etc." Kyl has also not held back from criticizing Trump. He has called the president "boorish" and "his own worst enemy." Yet he is apparently still willing to steer Trump's hugely consequential Cabinet and Supreme Court picks through the Senate gauntlet. (Phoenix New Times)

Likely No Debbie Stabenow (July 10, 2018): This Supreme Court vacancy represents a very consequential moment for our country. I have serious concerns about Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s record. Based on his past decisions, I am deeply concerned that he would roll back women’s access to reproductive health care, make it harder for Michigan families to get affordable health coverage, particularly if they have a preexisting condition, and weaken enforcement of our environmental laws, like our clean water laws that protect our Great Lakes. I intend to review his complete record and will evaluate his nomination thoroughly. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes David Perdue (July 10, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh has an outstanding career. I am excited by his nomination. This is the second nomination that President Trump has made for the United States Supreme Court. We all know, both Democrats and Republicans, what a great addition Neil Gorsuch was to the United States Supreme Court. I think Brett Kavanaugh is of the same ilk, and I think he will make the same sort of Justice – the type of Justice that supports and defends the Constitution of the United States...Now, the other side will tell you all bad things about this individual, just like they did with Neil Gorsuch. I’m here to tell you, we need to take politics out of this equation. This is about the future of our country. This is about an individual with an outstanding, objective, and independent record of defending and upholding the Constitution of the United States. I could not be more excited about a nominee than I am about Brett Kavanaugh. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes John Hoeven (July 10, 2018): I'm very supportive of him, just based on his track record and everything I've seen. I'll meet with him, we'll have a dialogue. But I'm supportive. He's the kind of person that will be a strict constructionist -- meaning uphold the Constitution, enforce the Constitution, and that's what we need... (AM1100TheFlag.com)

Likely Yes Todd Young (July 10, 2018): Sen. Todd Young said Tuesday he'll make his decision on whether to support Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court not based on how President Trump's choice would rule on specific cases, but on his overall judicial philosophy. And from what the Indiana Republican said he knows now, Kavanaugh has the "originalist" approach he's looking for. "Are they applying the Constitution and the laws as written? Or are they legislating from the bench," he said. "The former is what I think is needed in a federal judge." (IndyStar.com)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (July 10, 2018): I don't have an impression on Judge Kavanaugh as to where he may fall on the issue of abortion as well as the many other issues that I will weigh as we move forward with this process," Murkowski said. "So again, that's why I think all of us need to be doing our due diligence. I find it somewhat troubling that even before the President named Judge Kavanaugh that there were those who were roundly condemning the nominee without knowing who the nominee is," Murkowski said. "I think that there is a process -- that process needs to be fair, it needs to be open. We all, every member of the United States Senate has an equal obligation to thoroughly vet this nominee. And we will come down on one side or the other but in due deference to the nominee and in due deference to the president's prerogative to name a nominee. We have an obligation to thoroughly work through this advice and consent process. (CNN)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (July 10, 2018): Sen. Joe Donnelly, vulnerable Indiana Democrat, says he has to vet Kavanaugh’s record. But whether pre-existing conditions can still be covered under the ACA will be a “central part” of nomination, he told me, noting he supported the law to expand coverage for his constituents (Twitter)

Definitely No Bob Casey (July 10, 2018): You’ve got a Congress and both houses controlled by the hard right, you have an administration that shows great deference to the hard right on virtually every major issue...I’m not going to be complicit in turning over this third branch of government to the hard right...I’ve got a position and I’m not backing off that: I’m a No and I’m [going to] remain No. (The Philadelphia Inquirer)

Likely Yes Tom Cotton (July 10, 2018): The President did throughout this process what he promised to do on the campaign trail, what he did in his first opportunity to nominate a Supreme Court justice, is work from a list that he gave to the American people in advance of very distinguished jurists of all stripes. He selected Judge Kavanaugh who has a long and very impressive record from the D.C. Circuit, and before that as a very capable appellate lawyer in Washington, D.C. I’ve got now a stack of opinions on my desk that I’ll be reading through, which is one of the reasons why I left the law and became a soldier, but it’s part of the job. And then I’ll look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh very soon. (RealClearPolitics)

Likely No Gary Peters (July 10, 2018): Certainly, I have some immediate concerns. I’m concerned about some of his opinions on environmental issues — clean air, clean water issues, particularly given the crisis in Flint...He’s not been very open to allowing the Environmental Protection Agency to put in protections. With the upcoming updates to the Lead and Copper Rule, I'm concerned about what that may mean to protect populations from contamination. (The Detroit News)

Likely No Sheldon Whitehouse (July 10, 2018): I want to take my look at him, and I want to get answers to a bunch of questions. I have plenty of time before I'm obliged to cast a vote on him. And I think, for awhile, it's actually really important for the American people to understand that these Republican judicial nominees are coming through a special interest obstacle course moderated in secret by the Federalist Society, that there's a whole dark-money operation that goes into action to support their confirmations politically -- one donor gave nearly $18 million into the Garland to Gorsuch fight -- so there's a lot of smelly stuff that happens in this process that I think is going to be educational for Americans as we look later at Brett Kavanaugh. But we shouldn't look away from this messy process too early and have the American people not understand how this is the early stages of rigging. (NBC News)

Likely No Angus King (July 10, 2018): As I’m studying Judge Kavanaugh’s record, one of the key issues on my mind will be the ACA’s protections for individuals with pre-existing conditions, which the DOJ has decided not to defend in court. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Johnny Isakson (July 10, 2018): “He appears to have an impeccable record,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA) of the 53 year-old Kavanaugh. “He’s youthful, which I think is important for the history of the court, and the longevity of the court.” (WSBTV.com)

Unknown Deb Fischer (July 9, 2018): It was a privilege to be at the White House this evening when President Trump announced his nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. As the Senate begins the confirmation process, I will be thoroughly reviewing Judge Kavanaugh’s record and I look forward to visiting with him in person. (senate.gov)

Likely No Dianne Feinstein (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh's views are far outside the mainstream when it comes to health care, executive power, privacy and gun safety. We need a nominee who understands that the court must protect the rights of all Americans, not just political interest groups and the powerful. #SCOTUS President Trump has been crystal clear about his litmus tests. He said that any #SCOTUS nominee would oppose gun safety laws and Roe v. Wade would be overturned ‘automatically.' #WhatsAtStake Brett Kavanaugh appears to meet all of President Trump’s political promises for how his candidate will rule. Kavanaugh’s record both on the bench and as a Republican operative indicate that he would be among the most conservative justices in Supreme Court history. #SCOTUS (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Joni Ernst (July 9, 2018): Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a highly-qualified, well-respected justice committed to the rule of law. He deserves a respectful and timely confirmation and I stand ready to offer advice and consent to Judge Kavanaugh as he moves through the confirmation process. With Iowa’s Sr. Sen., Chuck Grassley, as Chair of the Judiciary Committee, we have a phenomenal leader overseeing the process to make sure it is smooth & timely. I look forward to the opportunity to confirm Justice Kennedy’s successor, Judge Kavanaugh, to the U.S. Supreme Court. (Twitter)

Definitely No Richard J. Durbin (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh is a judge who consistently favors big business and undermines protections for consumers, workers, women, and the environment. Replacing Justice Kennedy's swing vote with a far-right jurist like Judge Kavanaugh could change the rules in America. Just as troubling, in light of the ongoing Russia investigation, Judge Kavanaugh has expressed staunch opposition to criminal investigations of sitting Presidents. With a subservient Republican Congress and a far-right Supreme Court, there is a real risk that the worst impulses of the Trump presidency will go unchecked. The stakes for this nomination are historic. (Twitter)

Likely No Tammy Duckworth (July 9, 2018): The newfound urgency to fill Justice Kennedy’s Supreme Court seat from many of the same people who refused to even consider President Obama’s nominee is transparent opportunism that represents everything Americans hate most about politics today. We can’t ignore the reality that Donald Trump wants to take us back to a time when insurers could refuse coverage to people with pre-existing conditions or that he promised to only nominate Justices who would put the government back in between women and their doctors. If he succeeds, it won’t only affect people like me who could be prevented from having children through IVF; the impacts will be felt by everyone. Whoever replaces Justice Kennedy will play a critical role in the lives of all women and every single American. Moving forward, I will thoroughly review Judge Kavanaugh’s rulings, evaluate his qualifications and look for him to make it clear to the American public that he would be independent, not simply a rubber stamp for Donald Trump’s whims, if he hopes to earn my support. (Facebook)

Likely Yes Steve Daines (July 9, 2018): As a United States Senator, confirming a Supreme Court justice is one of the most consequential votes I will take. Brett Kavanaugh has an impressive background and excellent experience. I look forward to meeting with the nominee and reviewing his judicial record to ensure we are putting the most qualified justice on the highest court to defend the United States Constitution. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Ted Cruz (July 9, 2018): By any measure, Judge Kavanaugh is one of the most respected federal judges in the country and I look forward to supporting his nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. For over a decade, Judge Kavanaugh has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, often referred to as the second highest court in the land. He has over 300 published opinions, with a strong record of defending the Second Amendment, safeguarding the separation of powers, reining in the unchecked power of federal agencies, and preserving our precious religious liberties. Senate Democrats, sadly, will try to demagogue this nomination, but their efforts will not be successful. I am confident that the Senate will take up his nomination quickly, and I fully expect that he will be confirmed before the first Monday in October, the beginning of the Supreme Court's Term. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I look forward to his confirmation hearing, where Judge Kavanaugh will have the opportunity to demonstrate to the American people that he will uphold the rule of law and interpret the Constitution according to its original meaning. (senate.gov)

Unknown Michael D. Crapo (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh has a strong background of legal experience and knowledge and I congratulate him on this high honor. I take seriously my constitutional responsibility to thoroughly review this nomination. As that review is conducted, I have long said that judges at every level of our judicial system must look first and foremost to the Constitution for guidance in all legal matters and interpret it as it is written. Judges must not engage in creating new law by judicial activism from the bench. I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh once the confirmation process moves forward. (senate.gov)

Unknown Catherine Cortez Masto (July 9, 2018): President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court will hold immense power over the most critical issues facing our nation, including a woman’s right to choose, protection for those with preexisting conditions, LGBTQ rights, money in politics, and workers’ rights. We need a Justice who respects the rights and freedoms enshrined in our Constitution, not someone who is beholden to special interest groups. I plan to meet with Judge Kavanaugh in the coming months and will review his qualifications thoroughly. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Bill Cassidy (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh—solid pick. President Trump kept his promise, nominating a conservative faithful to the Constitution as written, recognized as having an excellent legal mind. We the Senate have the responsibility to examine his experience and temperament. I’ll meet with him, others will too, we’ll review his record, then vote on his confirmation. But based on his resume, his reputation, I suspect he’ll be confirmed. (senate.gov)

Likely No Christopher A. Coons (July 9, 2018): While Judge Kavanaugh has strong legal credentials...I'm concerned about the type of justice he would be on the Supreme Court. As a Senator, and in particular, as a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I will do my job in the coming weeks and months. I will meet with Judge Kavanaugh, thoroughly review his extensive record, and ask him direct, hard questions in both public and private settings. I will also do my best to make as clear as possible to the people of Delaware and the nation as a whole what it would mean to have Judge Kavanaugh on the highest court in the land. The American people deserve to know whether Judge Kavanaugh will act to dismantle the Affordable Care Act and protections for Americans with pre-existing conditions, sharply restrict access to abortion, further roll back worker's rights and environmental protections, expand the corrosive role of money in our politics, reverse the historic progress we've made for LGBTQ rights, and more. (Twitter)

Definitely No Thomas R. Carper (July 9, 2018): Unlike in the case of Merrick Garland, Judge Kavanaugh’s extreme record over the last 12 years stands in stark contrast to what the majority of the American people want. Overwhelmingly, the American people support protections for those living with pre-existing conditions. They support women having the freedom to make their own health care decisions and the freedom for people to marry the person they love. They support the right to privacy and equal access to the voting booth. They support independent checks on executive power. I have yet to meet a Delawarean who doesn’t want to ensure that their family can breathe clean air and drink clean water. With the stakes so high and Americans’ stances on these critical issues so clear, I say without hesitation: bring on the fight. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Benjamin L. Cardin (July 9, 2018): To that end, Judge Kavanaugh, like the others under public consideration, was picked by President Trump off a list of judges pre-approved by right-wing advocacy groups for their willingness to turn back the clock on civil rights and civil liberties, reproductive choice, equality, the Affordable Care Act, clean air and clean water, and protection from the abuses of corporate and political power, including the President of the United States. Most recently, Judge Kavanaugh argued that a young undocumented woman should not have access to an abortion even though she already met the strictest of requirements laid out by Texas law. And her argued in a dissent for Priests for Life v. HHS that the Affordable Care Act's religious accommodation to the contraceptive-coverage policy makes employers 'complicit in facilitating contraception or abortion.' I am also gravely concerned that Judge Kavanaugh would undermine the rule of law and allow unchecked abuse of presidential power by deferring criminal investigations and prosecutions of presidential misconduct until after President Trump leaves offices [sic]. The Supreme Court was designed as an independent check and balance against both the executive and legislative branches of government. It should not be a rubber stamp on the extreme partisan positions of the president. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Shelley Moore Capito (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh has served with distinction as a federal appeals court judge, a senior advisor to President George W. Bush, and a law clerk to Justice Anthony Kennedy. Throughout his service, Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated a strong commitment to the rule of law and to carefully considering the text and history of the Constitution, making him an ideal choice to be the next Supreme Court justice. Judge Kavanaugh has a particularly strong record of policing the separation of powers, seeking to ensure that lawmaking remains the prerogative of elected members of Congress. I think President Trump made an excellent choice in nominating Judge Kavanaugh. I look forward to meeting with him and remaining engaged and supportive of him during the confirmation process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Richard M. Burr (July 9, 2018): In nominating Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, President Trump has put forth a highly qualified and respected candidate committed to the rule of law. Judge Kavanaugh’s credentials are impeccable, and as a judge for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit he has considered many of the most pressing legal questions of our time. The Senate’s Constitutional charge is to provide its advice and consent to the President on his nominee to fill this vacancy. I am confident we will fulfill that responsibility fairly and promptly to ensure a complete and qualified Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Unknown Rand Paul (July 9, 2018): I look forward to the upcoming hearings, reviewing the record, and meeting personally with Judge Kavanaugh, with an open mind. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Mike Lee (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is a well-respected jurist who deservedly received bipartisan support when confirmed to the D.C. Circuit in 2006. I know him to be a smart and fair judge, one of the most admired appellate judges in the country. #SCOTUS #SCOTUSpick I look forward to the process in the Senate, getting to know Judge Kavanaugh and his family better in coming months, and, hopefully, voting to confirm him to the Supreme Court in the fall. #SCOTUS #SCOTUSpick (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Thune (July 9, 2018): I commend President Trump for his selection of Brett Kavanaugh to replace Justice Kennedy on the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh's judicial career has demonstrated his commitment to impartiality and faithful application of the Constitution. I look forward to sitting down with Judge Kavanaugh as we go through the confirmation process. Senate Democrats have already made it clear that they intend to listen to the far left of their party and fight this nominee regardless of his credentials. I encourage all of my colleagues to carefully review the qualifications of this nominee instead of trying to solicit his opinions on political issues, and to remember that the responsibility of a Supreme Court justice is to interpret the laws as written, not substitute political opinions for the law. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Ben Sasse (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh is a serious jurist known for careful deliberation. This doesn’t matter to many on the left. Sadly, the #Resistance is going to try to bork him by portraying him as a cross between Lex Luthor and Darth Vader. This isn’t the apocalypse – this is an opportunity to thoroughly review Kavanaugh’s record, debate this seriously, and celebrate our system of checks, balances, and limited government. (senate.gov)

Likely No Sherrod Brown (July 9, 2018): I'm already very troubled by the Supreme Court's recent decisions stripping rights from Ohioans, and I have serious concerns about some of Judge Kavanaugh's rulings against women's rights and consumer rights. I plan to review Judge Kavanaugh's record thoroughly and ask him tough questions face-to-face before I make my decision. I will not support any Justice who would take rights away from Ohioans. -SB (Twitter)

Unknown Bill Nelson (July 9, 2018): I look forward to meeting with the president's nominee in the coming weeks to discuss his views on several important issues such as protecting women's rights, guaranteeing access to health care for those with pre-existing conditions and protecting the right to vote, just to name a few. I will make my decision after that. (Tampa Bay Times)

Likely Yes Marco Rubio (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh is a qualified, mainstream jurist who possesses the right temperament and experience for the position, and I'm pleased to see his nomination to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. My decision on whether to ultimately support Kavanaugh's nomination will be based on his commitment to original intent, judicial restraint, and the understanding that the Supreme Court is a 'trier of law' appellate court and not a 'trier of fact' trial court. (Tampa Bay Times)

Likely Yes John Boozman (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is a distinguished jurist whose extensive experience and respect within the legal community make him uniquely qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. He has had an impressive legal career that the Senate recognized by confirming him with bipartisan support to the federal bench. I encourage my colleagues to thoroughly consider this nomination. I look forward to a fair confirmation process and hearing more from Judge Kavanaugh about his judicial philosophy. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Roy Blunt (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is a highly qualified nominee with an outstanding legal background. I look forward to learning more about his judicial record and talking with him about his judicial philosophy as the confirmation process moves forward. (Twitter)

Definitely No Richard Blumenthal (July 9, 2018): I'm voting no. (Twitter)

Likely No Michael Bennet (July 9, 2018): When Justice Kennedy announced his retirement, I urged the President to appoint a consensus nominee who could earn broad bipartisan support in the Senate and the confidence of the American people. Instead, he chose a nominee whose ideology would shift the Court's majority, thereby threatening fundamental rights and failing to check executive power. As a result, I have grave concerns about this nomination. (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Barrasso (July 9, 2018): The job of any judge – and certainly any Supreme Court justice – is to apply the law, not rewrite it. Judge Kavanaugh has the intellect, character and temperament to be an outstanding justice of the Supreme Court. I look forward to meeting him, following the confirmation hearings and learning more about his past decisions. (senate.gov)

Unknown Tammy Baldwin (July 9, 2018): People need an independent justice who will not overturn the law of the land on women’s health, health care for people with pre-existing conditions, and the constitutional rights and freedoms of all Americans. The stakes are very high for the American people and these are the things that I will be looking for as I review the nomination. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Lamar Alexander (July 9, 2018): The president has nominated a well-qualified jurist. Unfortunately, the Senate has gotten into a bad habit of treating good people as 'innocent until nominated.' Instead, I hope this confirmation process will be conducted with dignity and respect so that we may learn more about Judge Kavanaugh's character, temperament and attitudes. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes John McCain (July 9, 2018): In selecting Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the vacancy left by Justice Kennedy, President Trump has chosen a nominee with impeccable credentials and a strong record of upholding the Constitution. Over the course of Judge Kavanaugh's impressive legal career, he has built a reputation as a fair, independent, and mainstream judge who has earned widespread respect from his peers. One of the Senate's highest constitutional responsibilities is to provide advice and consent on nominations to the Supreme Court, and I look forward to the Senate fulfilling this critical duty through a fair and thorough confirmation process. (senate.gov)

Unknown Tim Kaine (July 9, 2018): Here's what I'm wondering about the #SCOTUSpick: Will Judge Kavanaugh respect rulings to uphold the ACA? Will he safeguard ALL Americans' civil rights? Will he protect women's freedom to make their own reproductive health care decisions? Will he be independent of this President? (Twitter)

Definitely No Kirsten E. Gillibrand (July 9, 2018): I stand by my pledge to vote no on President Trump’s nominee, because the American people deserve the opportunity to make their voices heard in November about this lifetime appointment. (Twitter)

Unknown Joe Donnelly (July 9, 2018): As I have said, part of my job as Senator includes thoroughly considering judicial nominations, including to the Supreme Court. I will take the same approach as I have previously for a Supreme Court vacancy. Following the president's announcement, I will carefully review and consider the record and qualifications of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. (Twitter)

Definitely No Charles E. Schumer (July 9, 2018): The Senate has come together on a bipartisan basis to protect women’s reproductive rights and to protect health care for millions of Americans before – including those with pre-existing conditions. We need to do it again. I will oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything I have, and I hope a bipartisan majority will do the same. The stakes are simply too high for anything less. (senate.gov)

Unknown Susan Collins (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh has impressive credentials and extensive experience... I will conduct a careful, thorough vetting of the President’s nominee to the Supreme Court, as I have done with the five previous Supreme Court Justices whom I have considered. (CNN)

Definitely No Kamala Harris (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh represents a fundamental threat to the promise of justice and equality, which is why I am announcing that I will oppose his nomination to the Supreme Court. (Email to supporters)

Definitely No Jeff Merkley (July 9, 2018): Here is #WhatsAtStake, and these are no longer wild hypotheticals; these are REAL and IMMINENT threats to our nation. Americans must rise up and make sure their Senators know that they oppose the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. (Twitter)

Unknown Doug Jones (July 9, 2018): Tonight's announcement is only a first step. A thorough vetting of Judge Kavanaugh’s body of work will be critical for the Senate to fulfill its shared responsibility—which I take very seriously. I will be diligent in measuring the record and in undertaking an independent review. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Mitch McConnell (July 9, 2018): President Trump has made a superb choice. Judge Brett Kavanaugh is an impressive nominee who is extremely well qualified to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Elizabeth Warren (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh's record as a judge and lawyer is clear: hostile to health care for millions, opposed to the CFPB & corporate accountability, thinks Presidents like Trump are above the law – and conservatives are confident that he would overturn Roe v. Wade. I'll be voting no. (Twitter)

Definitely No Edward J. Markey (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh is a right-wing ideologue selected off the ultra-conservative Federalist Society’s judicial wish list. His record on important issues portends a rubber stamp for an agenda that would move us backwards as a country. The Senate must reject this nominee. #SCOTUSPick (Twitter)

Likely Yes John Cornyn (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is an exceptionally-qualified jurist who will be a fair and impartial arbiter of the law and will not legislate from the bench. Throughout his tenure, Judge Kavanaugh has served with a high moral standard and demonstrated a clear commitment to faithfully intepreting the Constitution. (Twitter)

Definitely No Cory Booker (July 9, 2018): The nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court is enormously concerning and I’m strongly opposed to it. (senate.gov)

Unknown Heidi Heitkamp (July 9, 2018): Now I'll get to work to thoroughly review and vet his record to provide advice and consent for filling this vacancy, which is part of my constitutional duty. I take this job incredibly seriously and I expect the nominee to meet with senators, have a hearing, and receive a comprehensive review of his record. As an attorney and former attorney general, I understand the importance of this position for our judicial system and our country. I have no doubt that many members of Congress and outside groups will announce how they stand on the nominee before doing their due diligence and instead just take a partisan stance -- but that isn't how I work. An exhaustive and fair process took place for Justice Gorsuh, who I supported, and it should and must take place again now. (Twitter)

Unknown Jon Tester (July 9, 2018): I take my Constitutional duty to screen the President’s nominees very seriously, and in the coming weeks I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh. Montanans have a lot on the line with this next Supreme Court Justice so I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to put politics aside and do what’s best for this nation. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Tom Cotton (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh has an impressive record as a jurist and as a lawyer. This is a highly consequential nomination, and it deserves the most careful consideration, so I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh soon to discuss more in detail his views on the Supreme Court's role in our constitutional democracy. (senate.gov)

Likely No Maria Cantwell (July 9, 2018): I have grave concerns about this nomination and Judge Kavanaugh’s previous decisions on net neutrality and health care. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Todd Young (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is a well-respected judge with a strong record of honoring the Constitution and upholding the rule of law. I look forward to conducting a thorough and objective review of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination over the coming weeks, and I am hopeful that my colleagues will give him the same courtesy. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Ron Wyden (July 9, 2018): Tonight the president begins a forced march back to the days when women’s health care choices were made by government. There can be no mistaking Trump’s Supreme Court nomination for anything but what it is: a direct attempt to overturn Roe v. Wade. American women could lose the right to chart the courses of their own lives, finding their futures are determined by the whims of fanatical state legislators and the availability of contraception. Make no mistake: we will not go back to those days. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Roger Wicker (July 9, 2018): President Trump has once again kept his promise to nominate to the Supreme Court a well-qualified jurist with a record of upholding the integrity of the law and the Constitution. This appointment will help shape the nation’s highest court for a generation. I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh, and to the Senate giving full and timely consideration of this nominee. (senate.gov)

Likely No Sheldon Whitehouse (July 9, 2018): Special interests approved this nominee. The confirmation process will be powered by massive, secretive spending by their phony front groups. That’s why Brett Kavanaugh must convince me he can actually be independent. I, along with the American people, will not tolerate a rigged system anymore. (senate.gov)

Likely No Mark Warner (July 9, 2018): Time and time again, President Trump has said that he will only nominate candidates who will vote to undermine those rights and who will work to overturn Roe v. Wade. That simple fact, and that this nominee comes from a list put together by ultra-conservative groups who do not support these core values, give me grave concerns that Judge Kavanaugh is not the right pick to serve on our nation’s highest court. I plan to carefully examine Judge Kavanaugh's record and judicial philosophy. I cannot and will not support a nominee who would take this country backwards by undermining our fundamental rights and American values. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Chris Van Hollen (July 9, 2018): People in Maryland and across the country need and deserve a Supreme Court justice who will stand up for liberty and justice for all — not someone pre-selected by right-wing groups who consistently sides with powerful special interests over the rights of workers, consumers, and individuals. Brett Kavanaugh simply does not meet that basic standard, and I cannot support his nomination to the Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Tom Udall (July 9, 2018): The president pulled Judge Kavanaugh’s name from a pre-approved list concocted by radical, far-right special interests that are committed to undermining a woman’s right to choose, health care protections, safeguards for workers and seniors, LGBTQ rights, and a host of other critical public protections that touch the lives of every New Mexican and every American. These extreme groups put Judge Kavanaugh’s name on their list for a reason...The Senate has a constitutional responsibility to act as a coequal branch of government when it comes to the highest court in the land. We should not consider this nomination legitimate until we return to a real advise and consent process as required by the Constitution. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Patrick J. Toomey (July 9, 2018): I was pleased to see President Trump nominate Judge Brett Kavanaugh to a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States. Based on his reputation and resume, Judge Kavanaugh appears to have the intellect and experience necessary to serve on our nation's highest court. Judicial nominees, including those for the Supreme Court, should understand that the proper role of a judge is to apply the law, including the U.S. Constitution, as written. I plan to apply this standard while reviewing Judge Kavanaugh's record and I hope my colleagues will do the same so that Republicans and Democrats can work together to confirm highly qualified jurists. Considering a Supreme Court nominee is one of the greatest responsibilities a Senator has and I look forward to following the Senate Judiciary Committee's confirmation hearing and meeting Judge Kavanaugh in person soon. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Thom Tillis (July 9, 2018): Judge Brett Kavanaugh has impeccable credentials, serving on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the last decade and earning a reputation for being a mainstream and fair-minded jurist. Judge Kavanaugh undoubtedly has the right qualifications to serve as an associate justice on the Supreme Court, and I look forward to meeting with him in the coming weeks in advance of his confirmation hearing. I hope all my colleagues, regardless of their party affiliation, will ignore the pressure from partisan special interest groups by fairly and thoughtfully assessing Judge Kavanaugh based on his outstanding credentials and qualifications. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Dan Sullivan (July 9, 2018): I’ve had the pleasure of knowing Judge Brett Kavanaugh for some time – dating back to when we worked together in the Bush administration. He is very well regarded as a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals – the second most important court in the country. In that role he is known for applying the law and Constitution as written, upholding our Second Amendment rights, and having a healthy skepticism concerning the powers of federal administrative agencies. In the coming weeks, I look forward to reviewing in further depth Judge Kavanaugh’s extensive record as a D.C. Circuit judge, and discussing these and other important issues with him. I expect the upcoming Senate confirmation process to be both rigorous and fair, one deserving of a Supreme Court nominee. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Tina Smith (July 9, 2018): This is a pivotal moment for our country—the person who fills this seat long held by Justice Kennedy will shape the course of American democracy for decades. I had hoped that the President would appoint a consensus Justice, a person ready to protect the rights of all Americans over special interests and groups driven by political ideology. But make no mistake—Judge Kavanaugh will not be that Justice. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Richard C. Shelby (July 9, 2018): President Trump has made an excellent choice in nominating Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. He has impressive credentials, and I look forward to meeting with him to further consider his qualifications and commitment to upholding our Constitution as it is written. This nomination is one of the most important items that we will consider this year. I am hopeful that Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation process will be fair and timely. (senate.gov)

Unknown Jeanne Shaheen (July 9, 2018): The independence of the Supreme Court is critical to our democracy. Judge Kavanaugh must demonstrate his respect for precedent and his focus on defending the Constitution, independent of political influence or ideology. I look forward to reviewing his record, and to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh to discuss a number of key issues that underscore the indispensable values of equality and freedom. The Court has reaffirmed these principles in landmark decisions that maintained protections for women’s reproductive rights, LGBTQ civil liberties, and healthcare coverage for millions of Americans that depend on the Affordable Care Act. I will only support Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination if he protects the civil rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. (senate.gov)

Unknown Tim Scott (July 9, 2018): Now, more than ever, we need a Supreme Court Justice that will uphold free speech, religious liberty, and the rights given by the Constitution. Judge Kavanaugh has an impressive resume, and I look forward to meeting him and learning more about him through the confirmation process (senate.gov)

Likely No Brian Schatz (July 9, 2018): Judge Brett Kavanaugh has a troubling record of undermining civil liberties, opposing environmental protection, favoring corporations over workers, and undermining reproductive rights. It is disappointing that President Trump has again selected a nominee from a pre-determined list provided by a special interest group with a radical agenda. As a nominee from this list, Judge Kavanaugh represents a judicial philosophy that is committed to overturning Roe v. Wade and stripping millions of people with pre-existing conditions of their health care. It is now up to him to prove to the American people that he does not represent an extreme judicial doctrine, can serve as an independent check on the executive and legislative branches, and will champion civil liberties. I will continue to study Judge Kavanaugh’s record and follow his hearing closely, but I have grave reservations about this nominee. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Bernard Sanders (July 9, 2018): Let us be clear: President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh will be a rubber-stamp for an extreme, right-wing agenda pushed by corporations and billionaires. The coming Senate debate over the replacement of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy is about the future of Roe v. Wade, campaign finance reform, voting rights, workers' rights, health care, climate change, environmental protection and gun safety. Brett Kavanaugh, contrary to 200 years of Supreme Court precedent, believes a president 'may decline to enforce a statute . . . when the president deems the statute unconstitutional.' He ruled against a migrant teenager seeking to be released from custody in order to obtain an abortion. He believes a president can only be indicted after he leaves office and should not be subjected to civil suits while in office. He ruled the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was unconstitutional. And he would not uphold the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate. I do not believe a person with those views should be given a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court. We must mobilize the American people to defeat Trump’s right-wing, reactionary nominee. (senate.gov)

Unknown Mike Rounds (July 9, 2018): Appreciated the opportunity to join @POTUS at the White House for the announcement that he has nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to serve as an Associate Justice to the Supreme Court. Now, the Senate has a constitutional role of ‘advice and consent.’ I take this responsibility very seriously. Confirming conservative, fair-minded judges who will adhere to the Constitution is one of the most important responsibilities of the United States Senate. I look forward to a thorough and rigorous confirmation process. (Twitter)

Unknown Pat Roberts (July 9, 2018): Congrats to Judge Kavanaugh on his nomination to the #SCOTUS. I take my responsibility of 'advice and consent' very seriously & look forward to the @senjudiciary's thorough vetting of his record. I look forward to mtg Judge Kavanaugh & hope for a fair confirmation process. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Jim Risch (July 9, 2018): I was honored to be invited to the White House to attend the President’s introduction and nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court. Over the course of Judge Kavanaugh’s extensive career, he has shown a strong deference to the rule of law and has defended the separation of powers. His nomination, as well as Justice Neil Gorsuch’s, reflect President Trump’s deep commitment to upholding our U.S. Constitution. Once confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh’s presence on the high court will preserve this important document for generations to come. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Jack Reed (July 9, 2018): I opposed Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to a lower court seat because of his overtly partisan background. I did not believe he was a good fit to serve on the DC Circuit then, and I do not think he is a good fit for the Supreme Court now. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Rob Portman (July 9, 2018): I look forward to considering the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to serve as the next Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. The job of a Supreme Court justice is to fairly and impartially apply the law and to protect the rights guaranteed by the Constitution, not to advance public policy goals by legislating from the bench. Judge Kavanaugh has an impressive background. He is highly regarded as a fair-minded and independent judge and is clearly qualified to serve on the Supreme Court. I look forward to meeting with him in the coming weeks as he goes through a fair and thorough evaluation process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes David Perdue (July 9, 2018): President Trump has again fulfilled his promise to the American people and put forward an outstanding nominee to serve on the United States Supreme Court. Throughout his remarkable legal career, Brett Kavanaugh has shown a commitment to upholding our country’s Constitution. These principles are the bedrock of our nation and have made the United States exceptional since its founding. Judge Kavanaugh has an impressive academic and legal background...Judge Kavanaugh understands the long-lasting impact Supreme Court decisions have on our nation, and I look forward to meeting with him soon. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Patty Murray (July 9, 2018): President Trump, more than any President I’ve seen, has been explicit about what he expects from a nominee—and based on everything I know about Judge Kavanaugh, he is exactly what President Trump is looking for. So, I oppose this nomination. (Twitter)

Definitely No Christopher S. Murphy (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh is an anti-consumer zealot, an opponent of preexisting condition protections, a critic of abortion rights and access to contraception, a Second Amendment radical, and a bad choice for the Supreme Court. Not a close call. I will vote NO. (Twitter)

Unknown Lisa Murkowski (July 9, 2018): This evening the President nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. While I have not met Judge Kavanaugh, I look forward to sitting down for a personal meeting with him. I intend to review Judge Kavanaugh’s decisions on the bench and writings off the bench, and pay careful attention to his responses to questions posed by my colleagues on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Judiciary will also review Judge Kavanaugh’s qualifications prior to these hearings and issue a rating. I intend to carefully consider that rating, the information obtained through personal meetings, my own review of Judge Kavanaugh’s qualifications and record, and the views of Alaskans in determining whether or not to support him. My standard for reviewing Supreme Court nominees remains rigorous and exacting. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Jerry Moran (July 9, 2018): As a former Supreme Court clerk for Justice Kennedy and current Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals since 2006, Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a well-qualified nominee with extensive experience in the legal field. In the coming weeks, I will review Judge Kavanaugh’s body of legal writing and meet with him to discuss his interpretation of the law and make certain he will be a steadfast defender of our constitution. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Robert Menendez (July 9, 2018): Voters should have the opportunity to weigh in on the future of the Supreme Court this November, but we know that Republicans cannot afford to give them that chance. That’s why it will be up to Americans in every corner of this country to make their voices heard starting today and let every member of the Senate know that a vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh is a vote to make abortion illegal, end protections for patients with pre-existing conditions, and further rig our justice system in favor of rich and powerful corporate interests. (senate.gov)

Unknown Claire McCaskill (July 9, 2018): I look forward to thoroughly examining Judge Kavanaugh’s record in the coming weeks as the Senate considers his nomination to replace Justice Kennedy. (senate.gov)

Unknown Joe Manchin III (July 9, 2018): As the Senator from West Virginia, I have a constitutional obligation to advise and consent on a nominee to fill Supreme Court vacancies and I take that responsibility seriously. Just as I did when Merrick Garland and Neil Gorsuch were nominated, I will evaluate Judge Kavanaugh’s record, legal qualifications, judicial philosophy and particularly, his views on healthcare. The Supreme Court will ultimately decide if nearly 800,000 West Virginians with pre-existing conditions will lose their healthcare. This decision will directly impact almost 40% of my state, so I’m very interested in his position on protecting West Virginians with pre-existing conditions. As I have always said, I believe the Senate should hold committee hearings; Senators should meet with him, we should debate his qualifications on the Senate floor and cast whatever vote we believe he deserves. I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh, examining his rulings and making a determination of whether to provide my consent. (senate.gov)

Likely No Patrick J. Leahy (July 9, 2018): Based on an initial review of Judge Kavanaugh’s record, we are right to be concerned. President Trump views the independent judiciary as a political branch. He sees the courts as an extension of his power, not a check against it. Yet Judge Kavanaugh’s record reveals an endorsement of this expansive view of presidential power — views that ultimately may place the president above the law. And as a judge he has consistently attempted to dismantle environmental protections and to limit women’s rights. I also still have questions about how truthful he was during his 2006 confirmation hearing regarding his involvement in Bush-era detention policies. The heavy burden is now on Judge Kavanaugh to use his nomination hearing to be forthright with the American people. He must not evade fundamental questions that judicial nominees have answered for decades until recently. He needs to explain why we should believe he would be a justice for all Americans, independent of the President and the ideologically driven interest groups that selected him. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes James Lankford (July 9, 2018): Judge Brett Kavanaugh is an impressive and qualified nominee to be considered for the Supreme Court and it is vitally important that he receives a fair impartial nomination process in the Senate. In the weeks and months ahead, I look forward to meeting Judge Kavanaugh and evaluating his judicial philosophy. The Supreme Court has an obligation to protect the Constitution and to stand for the rule of law. A jurist who acts within the bounds of the Constitution and interprets the law as written protects the rights of all Americans to live in liberty. (senate.gov)

Likely No Amy Klobuchar (July 9, 2018): Serious concerns I have about Judge Kavanaugh in addition to the obvious health care & separation of power issues: He ruled that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was unconstitutional (reversed by full Circuit Court) & went out of his way to dissent against net neutrality (Twitter)

Likely No Angus King (July 9, 2018): Tonight’s selection of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who was included on this list, seems to be the culmination of a process that further erodes traditional norms. This is one of the most consequential decisions any Senator will make, and in evaluating Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination, I will thoroughly and thoughtfully research his positions, record, and judicial temperament – but I will do so with some skepticism, because the President has made clear, both on the campaign trail and after being sworn in, the type of Supreme Court Justice he would seek to nominate with regard to important issues like a woman’s right to choose, the Affordable Care Act and the limits of executive power. I am inclined to take him at his word that he would find a nominee who meets his criteria – but his standards and mine are vastly different on these topics. I’ve voted against ideologically extreme judges who do not reflect Maine’s values a number of times before, and, if my research indicates that Judge Kavanaugh is another such nominee, I will not hesitate to do so again. (senate.gov)

Unknown John Kennedy (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is obviously well-educated and has an impressive resume, but I look forward to getting to know him better throughout the confirmation process. I want someone who’s smart, intellectually curious and willing to test their assumptions against the arguments of those who disagree with them. During the Senate Judiciary hearings, I plan to delve into how he interprets a statute and how he would interpret the Constitution when it’s not clear. I want to understand how he thinks the judiciary fits in the Madisonian balance of separation of powers. I want to know if he respects the Bill of Rights and understands why we have a Bill of Rights. You really can’t tell whether that standard can be reached until you have a confirmation hearing. That’s why I look forward to a full and fair vetting process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Ron Johnson (July 9, 2018): A Supreme Court justice ought to be a judge, not a superlegislator – applying the Constitution as written, not altering it to reach a result. President Trump nominated a person who fit that description in Justice Neil Gorsuch last year, and to my understanding Judge Brett Kavanaugh fits it as well. I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh and the Senate moving expeditiously through the confirmation process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Johnny Isakson (July 9, 2018): I congratulate Judge Kavanaugh, who is a talented and experienced jurist, on his nomination to our nation’s highest court. I firmly believe that justices who understand and apply the law based on the U.S. Constitution, and not on their own personal political views, should fill seats on our Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh’s record indicates that he shares a strong commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law. I look forward to meeting with him soon and working with my Senate colleagues and the administration during the confirmation process to ensure that this highly qualified candidate is voted on by the Senate in time for the Court’s next session. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes James M. Inhofe (July 9, 2018): Brett Kavanaugh is an outstanding choice for the Supreme Court. Throughout his experience on the bench, Judge Kavanaugh has shown a commitment to upholding the Constitution and respecting judicial restraint. He has a strong history of decisions that respect religious liberty and the Second Amendment and has been a leader in ensuring the court respects the limit of executive authority, especially as it relates to environmental regulations. I applaud the president on selecting yet another well-qualified, respected judicial nominee and look forward to Judge Kavanaugh receiving a fair, thorough nominations process and then a swift up-or-down vote. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Cindy Hyde-Smith (July 9, 2018): I believe Judge Kavanaugh is a well-qualified conservative jurist, and I commend President Trump for his commitment to naming Supreme Court justices who are committed to the rule of law. I appreciate the significance of my responsibility to weigh the qualifications of the nominee, including his dedication to the Constitution and the fair interpretation of our laws. I look forward to being part of this important process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes John Hoeven (July 9, 2018): Tonight, @POTUS nominated Brett Kavanaugh to serve on the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh’s record shows deep respect & strict interpretation of the Constitution & I look forward to meeting with him as the confirmation process gets underway. #SCOTUSnominee (Twitter)

Likely No Mazie K. Hirono (July 9, 2018): Judge Brett Kavanaugh has not earned the benefit of the doubt. He has the burden of proof to demonstrate his ability to be independent of @realDonaldTrump and exercise unbiased and independent judgment. #WhatsAtStake...As a federal appellate court Judge, Kavanaugh’s record is replete with decisions favoring the privileged and powerful. His writings & rulings show a determination to restrict reproductive freedom & strip federal agencies of their power to protect our water, air, and safety. Kavanaugh has advocated that Congress legislate to exempt U.S. presidents from civil and criminal actions while in office. This is of deep concern at a time when Donald Trump is a defendant in numerous civil lawsuits and is the subject of a significant criminal investigation. (Twitter)

Likely Yes Dean Heller (July 9, 2018): Tonight, I had the opportunity to join my colleagues at the White House for the President’s announcement that he has nominated Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the upcoming vacancy on the U.S. Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh has a record of adherence to the Constitution and has demonstrated a commitment to interpreting the law – not making it. I expect the U.S. Senate to conduct a fair, thorough confirmation process, and I look forward to meeting with the nominee. (senate.gov)

Definitely No Martin Heinrich (July 9, 2018): At a time when our democratic institutions are under attack – from undermining the free press to foreign influence in our elections – I refuse to legitimize the broken system Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has created on President Trump’s behalf. We need to remedy both the political obstruction and broken rules that have led us into this terrible mess before confirming anymore nominees that will be tainted by it. Given the divisive climate in Washington, an independent judiciary is more important than ever and fundamental to the health of our democracy. That is why any nomination to our courts should require input from both parties and represent the kind of consensus that can see us through these turbulent political times. (Twitter)

Definitely Yes Orrin G. Hatch (July 9, 2018): I’m so pleased that the President has selected Judge Brett Kavanaugh to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court. I was honored that the President would consult me about this critical pick and invite me to attend the official White House announcement. Judge Kavanaugh is an outstanding choice. I know him from his previous confirmation to the D.C. Circuit. He is one of our nation’s most distinguished and influential jurists. During his more than twelve years on the bench, Judge Kavanaugh has authored hundreds of opinions on issues ranging from national security to agency rulemaking to constitutional rights. He has shown a deep commitment to the separation of powers and to both the First and Second Amendment. He will be a strong, principled voice on the Supreme Court. (senate.gov)

Likely No Margaret Hassan (July 9, 2018): I am concerned about Judge Kavanaugh’s commitment to the rights of all Americans given President Trump’s assurance that Roe v. Wade will be overturned by his nominees to the Court, coupled with the fact that this nominee came from a list of candidates developed with groups funded by corporate special interests. In the coming days, Judge Kavanaugh must be clear about how he views the importance of legal precedent and straightforward in his answers about past cases involving women’s reproductive rights, health care, the environment, LGBTQ equality, and the civil rights of all Americans. Senator McConnell has made it clear that he will break his own precedent and bring the nominee to the floor for a vote before the election, and I will therefore thoroughly review Judge Kavanaugh’s record and responses throughout the nomination process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Charles E. Grassley (July 9, 2018): Judge Kavanaugh is one of the most qualified Supreme Court nominees to come before the Senate. His credentials are well known, and he's served with distinction as a judge on the esteemed D.C. Circuit for more than a decade. He is a superb mainstream candidate worthy of the Senate's consideration. As we have always done when reviewing nominees for lifetime-appointed judgeships, the Senate Judiciary Committee will conduct a fair and comprehensive evaluation of the nominee's background and qualifications followed by hearings where we'll hear directly from the nominee as we fulfill our advice and consent responsibility. (senate.gov)

Definitely Yes Lindsey Graham (July 9, 2018): Brett #Kavanaugh will be an outstanding Justice on the Supreme Court. I also want to congratulate President @realDonaldTrump on this great choice. What a great night for the American people! (Twitter)

Unknown Cory Gardner (July 9, 2018): I look forward to meeting soon with Judge Kavanaugh. Over the coming weeks I will review his judicial record while also ensuring that Judge Kavanaugh will approach each case on its merits and follow the law as it is written. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will thoughtfully and thoroughly review this individual during the confirmation process and carefully consider him rather than making a knee-jerk decision based on politics and nothing else. (Twitter)

Unknown Jeff Flake (July 9, 2018): As I have said before, approving a nominee who will interpret the Constitution rather than legislate from the bench should be our top priority. I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh and reviewing his record throughout the confirmation process. (senate.gov)

Likely Yes Bob Corker (July 9, 2018): The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in our democracy, and the process of advice and consent on presidential nominations is one of the most serious responsibilities we have as United States senators. For more than 12 years, Judge Kavanaugh has served honorably on the federal bench, hearing critical cases before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. He is a well-respected jurist who understands the importance of upholding the Constitution and applying the law in a fair and independent manner. I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh during the confirmation process. (senate.gov)