by Signe Wilkinson / Philly.com / WPWG 2018

ON MONDAY, President Trump nominated Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court — a pick viewed to be enrobed with the expected conservative bona fides.

By Tuesday, though, critics were questioning whether one aspect of Kavanaugh’s legal history made him especially appealing to the president. Pointing to an article Kavanaugh published in 2009 in the Minnesota Law Review, some in the media suggested that the nominee thinks a president cannot be indicted. As The Washington Post’s Fact Checker reports, however, the text on Kavanaugh’s legal paper trail is not quite so black and white.

Here is how some political cartoonists (including Philly.com‘s Signe Wilkinson, top) are rendering judgment of Trump’s high court nomination:

STEVE SACK (Minneapolis Star Tribune):


by Steve Sack / Minneapolis Star Tribune / CagleCartoons.com 2018

DARRIN BELL (WPWG):


by Darrin Bell / WPWG 2018

DAVID FITZSIMMONS (Arizona Daily Star):


by David Fitzsimmons / Arizona Daily Star / CagleCartoons.com 2018

RANDALL ENOS (Cagle Cartoons):


by Randall Enos / CagleCartoons.com 2018

JACK OHMAN (Sacramento Bee):


by Jack Ohman / Sacramento Bee / WPWG 2018

LISA BENSON (WPWG):


by Lisa Benson / WPWG 2018

TOM TOLES (The Washington Post):


by Tom Toles / The Washington Post 2018

Read more:

Cartoonists satirize the path to Trump’s nominating a new Supreme Court justice