Red State Democrat Just Tearfully Explained Why She's Voting Against Brett Kavanaugh, and People Are Rallying Behind Her

Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND) announced on Thursday that she will not vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.

"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," Heitkamp said in a personal statement on Twitter.


"After doing my due diligence and now that the record is apparently closed, I will vote against his confirmation," Heitkamp said, adding that her vote to deny Kavanaugh a seat on the nation's highest court is part of her effort to stand up for women and survivors of sexual assault.

"Our actions right now are a poignant signal to young girls and women across our country," Heitkamp said. "I will continue to stand up for them."

Heitkamp cited the testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who last month publicly accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct at a house party in the 1980's. Heitkamp said through Ford, she "heard the voices of women I have known throughout my life who have similar stories of sexual assault and abuse."

Heitkamp later echoed the sentiments in an interview for ABC News, saying:

"This isn't a political decision. If this were a political decision for me, I certainly would be deciding this the other way. I can't get up in the morning and look at the life experience that I've had and say yes to Judge Kavanaugh."

New York's Kirsten Gillibrand said Heitkamp's decision "is a vote for her conscience and for her state, one she made regardless of any attacks she'll face."

"We need her to stay strong in this race, defeat Cramer and help protect the future of the Supreme Court," Gillibrand added.

A grateful public made shared their appreciation.

Heitkamp was lauded for her courage, as she currently trails in the polls to her Republican opponent in deep-red North Dakota.

Placing principle over politics has Twitter cheering - and donating.

The Senate begins voting on Kavanaugh's confirmation on Friday. It is expected to be a nailbiter and could end up determining which party wins control of the upper chamber in November's midterms.

Shannon Finney/Getty Images

Across the country, states have instituted stay-at-home orders in an effort to curb the spread of the highly contagious virus that's upended daily life in the United States.

Late last month, Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers issued one of these orders, urging his constituents to only leave their houses for necessary errands, such as getting groceries or filling prescriptions.

There's just one problem: Wisconsin's elections are scheduled for April 7. In addition to the Presidential primaries, Wisconsinites will vote for judicial positions, school board seats, and thousands of other offices.

The Democratic and Republican National Committees took the case to the Supreme Court, with Democrats arguing that the deadline for mailing absentee ballots should be extended by a week, to April 13, in order to facilitate voting from home.

With a Wisconsin Supreme Court Seat up for grabs on Tuesday, Republicans predictably made the case for why as few people as possible should be permitted to vote. It was a continuation of Wisconsin GOP efforts to suppress the vote, which included rejecting a demand from Governor Evers to automatically mail an absentee ballot to every resident.

The Republican majority in United States Supreme Court sided with the RNC and the election in Wisconsin will carry on as scheduled. This is despite Wisconsin being unprepared for the surge in absentee ballot requests, which leapt from a typical 250,000 to over 1.2 million in reaction to the virus. Thousands of these voters won't even receive these ballots until after the election, thereby preventing them from exercising their right to vote.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote a blistering dissent to the majority's decision, saying:

"Either [voters] will have to brave the polls, endangering their own and others' safety. Or they will lose their right to vote, through no fault of their own. That is a matter of utmost importance — to the constitutional rights of Wisconsin's citizens, the integrity of the State's election process, and in this most extraordinary time, the health of the Nation."

She was flabbergasted that her more conservative colleagues didn't think a global pandemic and national crisis was enough to justify emergency policies ensuring Wisconsinites their right to vote:

"The Court's suggestion that the current situation is not 'substantially different' from 'an ordinary
election' boggles the mind...Now, under this Court's order, tens of thousands of absentee voters, unlikely to receive their ballots in time to cast them, will be left quite literally without a vote."

A majority of the Supreme Court may not have agreed with Ginsburg, but the court of public opinion was fully on her side.





The Republican efforts indicated to some that the party cares more about maintaining control than preserving lives.




Large crowds are already gathering in Wisconsin to vote.

In a bit of devastating irony, the Supreme Court voted remotely when making its decision.

For more information about the tried and true tactic of GOP voter suppression, check out Uncounted, available here.

JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

Despite numerous cautions from medical experts—including those on his staff—President Donald Trump continues to tout hydroxychloroquine as a promising treatment for the virus that's brought daily life in the United States to a standstill.

The drug has undergone no clinical trials to scientifically test its efficacy on the virus, and the evidence on its behalf is anecdotal at best. One Fox News guest, Access Health International Chairman William Haseltine, called it a "quack cure."

Keep reading... Show less
Catherine Nance / Echoes Wire/Barcroft Media via Getty Images

President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, is back in the public eye after keeping a relatively low profile following the impeachment trial against his client.

Keep reading... Show less
FREDERIC J. BROWN/AFP via Getty Images // Mark Wilson/Getty Images

With the global pandemic bringing daily life in the United States to a screeching halt, the 2020 campaign has become somewhat of an afterthought as Americans focus on staying healthy and practicing social distancing.

But though the campaign trail is no longer in full swing, voters across the country can't help but see this crisis as a test of competence for President Donald Trump and a test of leadership for former Vice President and likely Democratic nominee Joe Biden.

Keep reading... Show less
Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images // Samuel Corum/Getty Images

A recent in-depth report from the Washington Post detailed the 70 day period between President Donald Trump's first knowledge of the virus and his eventual acknowledgment that the pandemic—which has killed over 10,000 people in the United States—poses a serious threat.

Trump's constant dismissal of the virus wasn't for lack of experts and longtime lawmakers warning him of the possibilities, as Washington Post opinion writer Greg Sargent points out.

Keep reading... Show less
JIM WATSON/AFP via Getty Images

Author and military historian Max Boot is a self-identified conservative, but he's by no means a supporter of President Donald Trump. Boot endorsed former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the 2016 Presidential election and he's frequently referred to Trump as the worst President in modern times.

But in a blistering new op-ed for the Washington Post, Boot removes the "in modern times" qualifier, referring to Trump as simply the worst President in U.S. history, citing his delayed and inadequate response to the virus that's brought the United States to a standstill.

Keep reading... Show less