Fox News Judge Says Brett Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Allegations 'Undermine' Entire Supreme Court

Fox News Senior Judicial Analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said sexual assault allegations against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh seeks to "undermine" the country's highest judicial body.

On Tuesday, Fox & Friends hosts warned viewers of "the left-wing campaign to push their progressive agenda" on the Supreme Court amid new, controversial accusations against Kavanaugh published this week by The New York Times which co-host Steve Doocy labeled "thinly sourced."

Napolitano then joined the Fox News crew in reacting to the "assault on the Supreme Court" and said that even if Democrats' impeachment efforts are unsuccessful against Kavanaugh, the allegations aim to undercut the credibility of a conservative majority court.

Co-host Ainsley Earhardt asked Napolitano to respond to a scathing piece by The Wall Street Journal's Editorial Board which lamented Democratic-led "rumor mill accusations" as Kavanaugh "receive[s] continuing education in the politics of personal destruction."

Napolitano reacted Tuesday, noting that SCOTUS' role atop government is a fragile balance rooted in legal respect: "It's certainly an effort to undermine Brett Kavanaugh as a credible legal thinker and member of the Supreme Court."

"Remember, the Supreme Court doesn't have an army to enforce its rulings. Its rulings are enforced because of the credibility that the legal community and the judicial community puts in these nine Justices and if you begin diminishing one of [the Justices] for reasons having nothing to do with his intellectual understanding of the law, that will undermine the court."

Napolitano said even if the accusations are true in some form, there is an unstated constitutional understanding that such crimes had to be committed while on the court or while seeking the seat -- but not prior to his nomination altogether.

"We don't know exactly what happened here: did the FBI know about this and not investigate it? That's a serious issue," Napolitano continued. "Were the questions to then-Judge Kavanaugh sufficient to have triggered an explanation to this and did he not answer truthfully? That's a serious issue. Can he be impeached? Look, the Constitution says impeachment is for treason or other high crimes and this phrase is not in the Constitution but we understand it to mean, 'committed during office,' and it would also pertain to 'while attempting to get into office.'"

"It comes despite a false sexual assault accusation, thinly sourced we should say, published in The New York Times," Doocy cautioned viewers. The newspaper's editorial page editor James Dao said Monday his department is "reviewing" a tweet which accompanied the report which "fell well below our standards."

The Fox & Friends hosts went on to say Democratic Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee Jerry Nadler is still considering impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump and not Kavanaugh. But Massachusetts Congresswoman Ayanna Pressley issued a statement this week saying, "sexual predators do not deserve a seat on the nation's highest court and Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation process set a dangerous precedent. We must demand justice for survivors and hold Kavanaugh accountable for his actions."

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board went on to blast several 2020 Democratic presidential candidates who continue to call for Kavanaugh's impeachment.

"These Democrats know there is zero chance of a Republican Senate voting to remove Mr. Kavanaugh from office," the WSJ Editorial Board wrote Monday. "The attacks on Justice Kavanaugh are an attempt at intimidation to influence his opinions. But if Democrats fail in that, they want to portray conservative opinions of the current Court as illegitimate."

Many conservatives have accused Christine Blasey Ford and others who testified against Kavanaugh at his confirmation hearings last year of being "politically motivated." Several Republicans continue to dismiss any accusations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh as an attempt to protect abortion rights should the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling be challenged in the future.