Readers React: A Republican president nominated a conservative judge. Why is this so traumatic?

To the editor: UC Berkeley Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, in an attempt to appear even-handed in “the matter of bias” on federal appeals court judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court, seems to assent that bias is part of human nature and that “no one suggests that our knowledge about [a nominee’s] general views … makes them impermissibly biased.”

Chemerinsky goes on to state: “President Trump has made clear that he picked Kavanaugh for his conservative views. It is equally appropriate for the Senate to deny confirmation because of those views.”

Really? So where does that leave us? I guess it is only “appropriate” for the Senate to confirm nominees biased by their liberal views.

Kevin Davis, Beverly Hills

..

To the editor: No president who is being investigated in a case that could allege impeachable offenses should be allowed to nominate anyone for a seat on the Supreme Court until that investigation has been completed and the findings made available to the public.

What bigger quid pro quo can there be than nominating a judge for a seat on the highest court in the land because that judge has expressed views suggesting he would rule in favor of that president and therefore keep him in office?

Roberta Quiroz, Los Angeles

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook