Law profs and undoing Supreme Court damage

As discussed at Living with Supreme Court damage, more than 1,000 law school professors signed a letter saying Judge Kavanaugh should not be confirmed because he "displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land" and "he did not display the impartiality and judicial temperament requisite to sit on the highest court of our land."

America has had a media onslaught that Judge Kavenaugh lacks the judicial temperament to be on the Supreme Court.

In the Senate debate yesterday and today, the Democrat Senators pounded that Judge Kavanaugh lacks the judicial temperament to serve on the Supreme Court and that confirming him is an egregious mistake. The Republican Senators  adamantly contended to the contrary.

It remains to be seen what Americans will carry away from the confirmation of Judge Kavanagh.

The combination of the media onslaught and the pounding of the Democrat Senators against Judge Kavanaugh, supported by the letter of the law professors, may greatly undermine the confidence of Americans in the United States Supreme Court and its Justices, and in Americans having confidence in  the United States Senate to perform its advise and consent role to assure that persons who become Justices on the Supreme Court are qualified.

At a minimum, if the extreme contentiousness continues, it will feed the country's polarization, with the two sides' anger augmented by cross accusations by Democrats that the Republicans rammed through a candidate who has no business being on the Supreme Court and the Republicans angrily firing back about the despicable efforts of the Democrats to destroy a good and decent man for partisan power seeking purposes.

Much anger and contentiousness are likely to continue regarding Justice Kavenaugh. The law professors will have a responsibility in the situation that their letter will be available for use by those who don't let go of the attack on Justice Kavanaugh.

Maybe the law professors are fine with their letter being used as ammunition in continuing political warfare between the two political sides and don't mind if they are contributing the country's mounting polarization.

Maybe the law professors don't wish that and would like to contribute to reducing polarization.

Reconsideration of their letter
The law professors need to be presumed to have given careful consideration to what their letter said and they were prepared to stand by their letter at the time of signing it and  in the future (subject to the possibility of the law professors changing their view after they observe for a time how Judge Kavanaugh performs as Associate Justice Kavanaugh).

Reconsideration of their letter would be a very hard thing for the law professors to do.

Nonetheless, it is urged that the law professors reconsider their letter.

One thing for law professors to do (which they may have done before signing the letter) is introspection and doing a personal inventory of instances in which they had angry, antagonistic outbursts, and the circumstances and provocation for same, and have those in mind as they judge Judge Kavanaugh's anger and aggression that were exhibited in the hearing and taking into account the provocation of same.

Remonstration of the Senators
There is much to criticize about how the Senators carried out their confirmation hearings and misunderstandings and distortions that Americans got about the role of the Supreme Court and about Judge Kavanaugh's judicial opinions. These misunderstandings and distortions feed into the country's polarization problem.

The law professors could prepare and publish  a writing that corrects the misunderstandings and distortions that get conveyed to lay viewers of the hearings.