New Reporting Details How FBI Limited Investigation of Kavanaugh Allegations

September 17, 2019by Jackie Calmes
Supreme Court Associate Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday, Sept. 5, 2018. (Christy Bowe/Globe Photos/Zuma Press/TNS)

WASHINGTON — As Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh prepares for his second year on the Supreme Court, new reporting has detailed how the limits ordered by the White House and Senate Republicans last year constrained the FBI investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct when he was a college freshman.

The FBI was informed of allegations that Kavanaugh, while drunk during his freshman year at Yale, exposed himself to two heavily intoxicated female classmates on separate occasions. The bureau did not interview more than a dozen people who said they could provide information about the incidents.

One of the accounts, reported by Deborah Ramirez, was made public at the time of Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings.

The other, not publicly known until this weekend, was reported by a male classmate who said he witnessed the incident. He unsuccessfully sought to get the FBI to investigate with help from a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee who asked FBI Director Christopher A. Wray to look into the allegation.

The new details are based on interviews conducted by this reporter and two reporters for The New York Times for books about the confirmation. The New York Times reported some details late Saturday from its reporters’ new book.

Wray has declined requests by this reporter to be interviewed about the bureau’s performance. Kavanaugh also declined to be interviewed.

The best-known allegation against Kavanaugh was the accusation by Christine Blasey Ford, a psychology professor from California, that he assaulted her when they were high school students. Kavanaugh heatedly denied her allegation when he and Ford testified before the Judiciary Committee in a televised hearing.

The committee’s Republican majority declined to give a public hearing to Ramirez, and it is unclear how many senators knew of the allegation of a second, similar incident at Yale. The committee’s chairman, Sen. Charles E. Grassley, R-Iowa, and its senior Democrat, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, were both informed of the existence of the allegation.

Ramirez alleged that Kavanaugh exposed his penis and caused her to touch it while they were inebriated during a drinking game in a dormitory suite in late 1983 or early 1984. Kavanaugh denied her allegation.

The other allegation, previously unreported, came from Washington lawyer Max Stier, who told Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., that he witnessed Kavanaugh exposing himself to a different female classmate during their freshman year.

Both Kavanaugh and the woman were heavily intoxicated at the time, according to Stier’s account, as described by people familiar with the contacts between him and Coons and others who have spoken with Stier since Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

The woman in that case, a friend of Ramirez, has denied that she was assaulted, telling friends she has no memory of such an incident. According to Stier’s account, the woman was so inebriated at the time that she could easily have no memory of it.

Coons sent Wray a letter on Oct. 2 — four days before the Senate voted on Kavanaugh — specifically naming Stier as someone he wanted the FBI director to follow up with.

The FBI never contacted Stier. The bureau also did not interview other classmates who said they had heard at the time of either the incident Stier reported or the one involving Ramirez.

Stier has declined to comment publicly on the allegation. He wanted his account to remain confidential, both for the sake of the woman, a widow with three children, and for his own professional considerations.

Stier founded a nonpartisan, nonprofit group to promote public service roughly two decades ago. Before that, he was a lawyer at Washington’s Williams & Connolly firm, where he worked with the team that defended then-President Bill Clinton. Several Republican commentators on Sunday zeroed in on that part of his resume to discredit his account as partisan.

During the hearings, Kavanaugh stated under oath that he was never so drunk that he would pass out or forget what he’d done while intoxicated.

A number of former classmates who knew him said they were sufficiently upset by that statement, which they considered untruthful, that they contacted the FBI. None received responses from the bureau.

On Sunday, President Donald Trump defended Kavanaugh.

Trump called on the Justice Department to “come to (Kavanaugh’s) rescue,” suggesting on Twitter that the administration’s opponents were trying to deter the justice from rulings favorable to the administration.

“They are trying to influence his opinions. Can’t let that happen!” he wrote.

“He is an innocent man who has been treated HORRIBLY,” Trump wrote in one tweet. In another, he urged that the justice sue for “liable,” later correcting the spelling to “libel.”

The new reports reopened some of the bitter, partisan divisions that accompanied Kavanaugh’s confirmation. Several Democratic presidential hopefuls called for Kavanaugh’s impeachment, including Sen. Kamala Harris, a Judiciary committee member, who wrote on Twitter that “Brett Kavanaugh lied to the U.S. Senate and most importantly to the American people.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, former Housing Secretary Julian Castro and former Rep. Beto O’Rourke made similar calls.

Warren tweeted that the new allegations were “disturbing,” adding, “Like the man who appointed him, Kavanaugh should be impeached.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said he supported using “any appropriate constitutional mechanism” against Kavanaugh.

At the time that Coons reported Stier’s allegation to the FBI director, the White House and Senate Republican leaders had directed the bureau to reopen Kavanaugh’s background check. They acted under pressure from three undecided Republican senators who wanted an investigation of the allegations made by Ford and Ramirez.

The Judiciary Committee’s Republican majority gave the FBI a week and said agents could interview four people. The list was later expanded to 10 people at the insistence of the swing-vote senators.

Lawyers for Ford and Ramirez, however, sent letters to Wray that, together, named more than 50 individuals that the bureau’s agents should interview. Only nine were ever contacted — all of them from the list that the Republicans had submitted.

One of the letters named the woman in the incident Stier said he witnessed.

“We have been advised that while at Yale, Mr. Kavanaugh exposed himself” to the woman “and forced her to touch his penis. Witnesses were present and we have been advised that they will be contacting the FBI with their first-hand accounts,” the letter said.

Stier knew both Kavanaugh and the young woman and has told people that he is certain of their identities. According to his account, two drunken male students dragged the woman toward Kavanaugh, who was also intoxicated and standing with his penis exposed, amid much laughter from the men.

The FBI’s reopened background check, which began late on Friday, Sept. 28, lasted less than a week.

The following Saturday, Oct. 6, the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh by a largely party-line vote of 50-48, the narrowest margin of support for a new justice since 1881.


(Times staff writer Laura J. King contributed to this article.)


©2019 Los Angeles Times

Visit the Los Angeles Times at

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Challenge to Consumer Bureau's Authority Supreme Court
Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Challenge to Consumer Bureau's Authority
October 18, 2019
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court agreed Friday to wade into a politically charged dispute over whether the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, is constitutional. The justices will be reviewing an appeals court decision that upheld the structure of... Read More

Justices to Consider Life-Without-Parole Sentences in D.C. Sniper Case Supreme Court
Justices to Consider Life-Without-Parole Sentences in D.C. Sniper Case
October 15, 2019
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON - Do a pair of decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court require the resentencing of Lee Boyd Malvo, the surviving assailant in the D.C. sniper case? That's the question the justices will consider when it convenes Wednesday to hear oral arguments in the case Mathena... Read More

Supreme Court to Consider State Role in Prosecuting Immigrants Supreme Court
Supreme Court to Consider State Role in Prosecuting Immigrants
October 15, 2019
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear arguments about whether states can prosecute immigrants who use other people's Social Security numbers to get a job. The case not only has implications for the balance of power between the states and the federal government when... Read More

Supreme Court Weighs Ending Non-Unanimous Jury Verdicts in Criminal Cases Law
Supreme Court Weighs Ending Non-Unanimous Jury Verdicts in Criminal Cases
October 10, 2019
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court this week took up a question it has avoided in recent years: Whether the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution requires unanimous verdicts in criminal cases in both federal and state courts. In practice, the Bill of Rights applies to both the... Read More

Supreme Court to Rule on Gun Law As Mass Shootings Create Outrage Guns
Supreme Court to Rule on Gun Law As Mass Shootings Create Outrage
October 10, 2019
by Tom Ramstack

WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court cast itself back into the emotional gun rights controversy when it put a lawsuit over a New York City ban on the transportation of  firearms on its schedule for its current session. The New York law bans most transportation of guns... Read More

Supreme Court Debates Whether Discrimination by 'Sex' Includes Gay and Transgender Workers Supreme Court
Supreme Court Debates Whether Discrimination by 'Sex' Includes Gay and Transgender Workers
October 8, 2019
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON - The cases came from New York, Georgia and Michigan. In one, Donald Zarda, a Long Island man who taught skydiving for 15 years, was fired by his employer, Altitude Express, when a female customer complained that he had told her he was gay to... Read More

Straight From The Well
scroll top