This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45687301

The article has changed 9 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Brett Kavanaugh: Trump court nominee clears first hurdle Brett Kavanaugh: Trump court nominee clears first hurdle
(35 minutes later)
A US Senate committee has voted to approve Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the US Supreme Court as discussions continue over a possible FBI inquiry into allegations of sexual misconduct. A US Senate committee has voted to approve Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the US Supreme Court - but on the condition of an FBI investigation into sexual misconduct allegations.
The vote came as a key Republican senator said he wanted a week's delay in confirmation hearings for Judge Kavanaugh to allow this to happen. As a result, a full Senate vote on Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation has been delayed for up to a week.
However, Jeff Flake supported the vote to pass the nomination from the Judiciary Committee to the full Senate. The inquiry would be limited to "current credible allegations", the Senate Judiciary Committee said.
The final vote was 11-10 in favour. Judge Kavanaugh denies allegations from at least three women.
All the Republicans voted in favour, while all Democrats voted against. Republican leaders in the Senate agreed to support the request for an FBI inquiry, and President Donald Trump has now ordered it should go ahead.
On Thursday, the committee heard testimony from Christine Blasey Ford, now a professor of psychology in California, who says Judge Kavanaugh - nominated to the court by President Trump - sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers in the 1980s.
Judge Kavanaugh also testified on Thursday, angrily rejecting the allegation he had ever assaulted her or anyone else. He accused Democrats of politicising the process and harming his family and good name.
What might the FBI do in a week?
Analysts say an FBI investigation into the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh would not be a "new" investigation.
It would be reopening its previously completed background check on Judge Kavanaugh. This might mean going back to old witnesses - or speaking to new ones.
Friday saw Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee throw out Democrat attempts to subpoena Mark Judge, a friend of Judge Kavanaugh who Dr Ford said had witnessed the assault on her 36 years ago. Mr Judge had told the committee in a written statement that he did not recall any such incident.
After the committee had adjourned, Mr Judge's lawyer Barbara Van Gelder said: "If the FBI or any law enforcement agency requests Mr Judge's co-operation, he will answer any and all questions posed to him."
What exactly has happened?What exactly has happened?
On Thursday, the Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony from Christine Blasey Ford, now a professor of psychology in California, who says Judge Kavanaugh - nominated to the court by President Donald Trump - sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers in the 1980s. On Friday, a day after hearing from Dr Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, the Senate Judiciary Committee split along partisan lines in a vote on passing Judge Kavanaugh's nomination to the full Senate.
Judge Kavanaugh also testified on Thursday, angrily denying he had ever assaulted her or anyone else - and accusing Democrats of politicising the process and harming his family and good name.
Friday saw the Senate Judiciary Committee split along partisan lines in passing a motion to hold a vote on passing Judge Kavanaugh's nomination to the full Senate.
Democrats accused the 11 Republicans of attempting to rush the process, while Republicans countered that the 10 Democrats were using the sexual assault allegations in an attempt to delay - and ultimately block - the conservative judge from joining the Supreme Court.Democrats accused the 11 Republicans of attempting to rush the process, while Republicans countered that the 10 Democrats were using the sexual assault allegations in an attempt to delay - and ultimately block - the conservative judge from joining the Supreme Court.
But later, after impassioned speeches from both sides in the committee and later discussions between members, the time for the vote came and went without one being held. Then, amid much confusion, Arizona Republican Jeff Flake told the committee that he would back the motion to send Judge Kavanaugh's nomination for a full vote on the Senate floor - but would not support his confirmation in the Senate without the additional FBI probe for which the Democrats and the American Bar Association (ABA) had pressed.
Amid much confusion, Mr Flake clarified to the committee that he would back the motion to send Judge Kavanaugh's nomination for a full vote on the Senate floor - but would not support his confirmation in the Senate without the FBI probe for which the Democrats and the American Bar Association had called. The vote then went ahead. The vote then went ahead, with all 11 Republicans including Mr Flake in favour and all 10 Democrats - despite welcoming Mr Flake's intervention - voting against.
Republicans control the Senate by a narrow 51-49 majority. Without the support of Mr Flake and one other Republican senator - and assuming all Democrats vote against - the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh cannot occur. A statement issued later by the committee said it would "request that the administration instruct the FBI to conduct a supplemental FBI background investigation".
Two other senators considered "swing" votes that could go either way - Republican Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Democrat Joe Manchin (West Virginia) - have already indicated that they support Senator Flake's call for a delay. It said: "The supplemental FBI background investigation would be limited to current credible allegations against the nominee and must be completed no later than one week from today."
A simple majority of those present is needed for the confirmation. If there is a tie, the vice-president, who presides over the Senate, casts the deciding vote.
Why is this vote so important?Why is this vote so important?
The Supreme Court plays a vital role in US political life - appointed for life, its nine members have the final say on US law. The Supreme Court plays a vital role in US political life. Appointed for life, its nine members have the final say on US law.
This includes highly contentious social issues, such as abortion, and challenges to government policy.This includes highly contentious social issues, such as abortion, and challenges to government policy.
Judge Kavanaugh's appointment could tilt the balance in favour of conservatives for years to come.Judge Kavanaugh's appointment could tilt the balance in favour of conservatives for years to come.
Mr Flake, who often differs from Mr Trump and the Republican leadership in Congress, issued a statement shortly before Friday's session stating that he would back Judge Kavanaugh. Republicans control the Senate by a narrow 51-49 majority. Without the support of Mr Flake and one other Republican senator - and assuming all Democrats vote against - the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh cannot occur.
A simple majority of those present is needed for the confirmation. If there is a tie, the vice-president, who presides over the Senate, casts the deciding vote.
Mr Flake, who often differs from Mr Trump and the Republican leadership in Congress, had issued a statement shortly before Friday's session stating that he would back Judge Kavanaugh.
On his way to the committee room, he was berated by two women who said they were victims of sexual violence and urged him to change his mind.On his way to the committee room, he was berated by two women who said they were victims of sexual violence and urged him to change his mind.
Speaking to reporters at the White House after the committee vote, Mr Trump said he would leave it to Senate leaders to decide how to proceed.Speaking to reporters at the White House after the committee vote, Mr Trump said he would leave it to Senate leaders to decide how to proceed.
"Whatever they think is necessary is okay," he said. "They have to do what they think is right.""Whatever they think is necessary is okay," he said. "They have to do what they think is right."
But he continued to support Judge Kavanaugh, saying he had not thought "even a little bit" about a replacement - but added that he had found Dr Ford a "credible witness".But he continued to support Judge Kavanaugh, saying he had not thought "even a little bit" about a replacement - but added that he had found Dr Ford a "credible witness".
What next?
By Anthony Zurcher, Washington reporter
It would be hard to top Thursday's Senate Judiciary Committee drama, but Friday's proceedings came close.
First, what we know for certain: Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination has been approved by a straight party-line vote in the committee. It now moves to the floor of the Senate for a final action.
Beyond that, everything is up in the air. Senator Flake, after saying he would back Judge Kavanaugh, faced two emotional protesters in a gripping confrontation in a lift. He later brought the committee to a standstill with behind-the-scenes negotiations with his Democratic colleagues. What emerged appears to be a request for a one-week delay of the final Senate vote pending an FBI investigation.
That, minus the timeline, is what Democrats have been demanding all along - and Mr Flake may have just helped them get it.
If the White House issues the requisite instructions, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell accommodates, Mr Flake will be satisfied. If not, the Arizona senator could help sink Judge Kavanaugh in the final confirmation vote.
A verbal agreement, as they say, is seldom worth the paper it's written on. Plenty can happen to derail this last-minute accord. Two days of drama may just be the beginning.
What might the FBI do in a week?
Analysts say an FBI investigation into the allegations of sexual assault against Judge Kavanaugh would not be a "new" investigation.
It would be reopening its previously completed background check on Judge Kavanaugh. This might mean going back to old witnesses - or speaking to new ones.
The FBI director would not launch it himself but would need to be instructed by the Department of Justice, which would itself be instructed by President Trump.
Before Senator Flake's move, Republicans on the Senate judiciary committee threw out Democrat attempts to subpoena Mark Judge, a friend of judge Kavanaugh who Dr Ford said had witnessed the assault on her 36 years ago. Mr Judge had told the committee in a written statement that he did not recall any such incident.
After the committee adjourned, Mr Judge's lawyer Barbara Van Gelder said: "If the FBI or any law enforcement agency requests Mr Judge's co-operation, he will answer any and all questions posed to him."
Are there other allegations against Kavanaugh?Are there other allegations against Kavanaugh?
Yes, and new ones appeared ahead of Thursday's hearing. At present they are:Yes, and new ones appeared ahead of Thursday's hearing. At present they are:
Judge Kavanaugh denies these allegations, and on Thursday called Ms Swetnick's allegation "a joke" and "a farce".Judge Kavanaugh denies these allegations, and on Thursday called Ms Swetnick's allegation "a joke" and "a farce".