The confirmation hearing for US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh [SCOTUSblog profile] continued for a second day [SCOTUSblog live blog] Wednesday.

Kavanaugh faced numerous questions [The Hill report] covering a wide breadth of issues, including whether he would shield President Donald Trump from any possible charges he may face in light of the opinions he voiced in a 2009 Minnesota Law Review article [text, PDF].

In his article, Kavanaugh argued that sitting presidents should be granted a temporary deferral of both civil lawsuits and criminal prosecutions and investigations until they are out of office. Kavanaugh wrote:

I believe it vital that the President be able to focus on his never-ending tasks with as few distractions as possible. The country wants the President to be “one of us” who bears the same responsibilities of citizenship that all share. But I believe that the President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office.

He noted that although he did not always hold this belief, he developed his opinion after he witnessed former president Bill Clinton undergo a sexual harassment case and the criminal investigations it spawned. This, Kavanaugh wrote, interfered with Clinton’s ability to further investigate and protect the US from national security threats such as Osama Bin Laden.

In response to questions from Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska concerning these beliefs, Kavanaugh stated that he did not think anyone, including a sitting president, was above the law. Kavanaugh also clarified that he did not think that a sitting president is immune from the civil and criminal process, but rather, when dealing with a president, there may be an issue of timing.

Also on the issue of how Kavanaugh may confront potential legal issues Trump may face, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee Senator Chuck Grassley asked [BBC report] whether he believed that a sitting president should be required to respond to a subpoena. Kavanaugh responded by stating that he could not answer that question.

Among the other issues addressed [ABC News report] in the second day of hearings was Kavanaugh’s views on the role of judicial independence and Roe v. Wade. On judicial independence, Kavanaugh responded by identifying as a “pro-law” judge who would rule in favor of the party with the law on their side and not in accordance with whatever political pressure or influence others may attempt to impose on him. Kavanaugh, in keeping with what he termed as the precedent set by prior Supreme Court nominees, responded to questions on how he would rule on any potential challenges to Roe v. Wade by stating that if he answered that question, he could not approach any potential challenge with an open mind and that doing so would be a violation of judicial independence.

Kavanaugh’s hearing is currently set to wrap up Friday.