WASHINGTON, D.C. July 10 (DPI) – Trump has nominated the mainstream conservative Federal Appeals Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh for the US Supreme Court, already setting off outrage on one side of the great American social divide – and strutting confidence on the other.

Nowhere is that divide more obvious than in the two editorials offered up today in The New York Times, the nation’s standard bearer of progressive public activism and social justice, and in The Wall Street Journal, the self-appointed defender of free markets and individual liberties.

One – the NYT’s – characterizes Kavanaugh as a “radical” whose nomination is a threat to social justice, who will “take away” legal protections. But it also carried a tone of inevitability and surrender, as it appeals to voters in future elections to fix the problem:

Americans who care about the court’s future and its role in the American system of government need to turn to the political process to restore the protections the new majority will take away, and to create an environment where radical judges can’t be nominated or confirmed. As those tireless conservative activists would be the first to tell you, winning the future depends on deliberate, long-term organizing in the present, even when — especially when — things appear most bleak.

Meanwhile, The Wall Street Journal predictably offered a supportive editorial of the nominee, but in its closing comment also made an appeal to voting – not unlike that in The Times editorial:

We firmly believe that liberals have much less to fear from a conservative majority than they imagine. A genuinely conservative Court might even help progressives by liberating them to focus once again on the core task of self-government—persuading their fellow Americans through elections, not judicial fiat.

Supreme Court nominations in recent decades have become national litmus tests for ideological purity, and with the Republicans still clinging to power on Capitol Hill and with filibuster rules gutted years before by Democrats, there is a good chance the political minority in Washington can do little but watch as the nominee is confirmed to succeed the moderate justice Anthony Kennedy.   The Times editorial reflected that reality.

But it’s still not clear, if Kavanaugh is confirmed and is elevated to the court, how much he and his fellow jurists can and will impact the dramatic social change well under way in America.  For one thing, this already conservative Supreme Court has shown an inclination to not address or reverse established law – most notably Roe vs. Wade, the landmark 1973 abortion decision.

Moreover, if the Yale-educated Kavanaugh is the towering intellect his supporters say he is, the Democrats should take some solace that the nominee is not a dangerous ideologue, and he’s likely to show greater flexibility in his opinions and interpretation of the law.