An opinion piece by a law professor in The New York Times Thursday argued that the “credible allegations” against Brett Kavanaugh should be enough to keep him off the Supreme Court. Not to be outdone, The Washington Post published a piece arguing that withdrawing Kavanaugh’s nomination wasn’t just the right thing to do; it would also prevent future rapes.

Sandra Newman writes:

… On MSNBC, Bari Weiss mused: “Let’s say [Kavanaugh] did this exactly as she said. Should the fact that a 17-year-old, presumably very drunk kid, did this, should this be disqualifying?”

It’s a question that can only be answered affirmatively. And not just because what Kavanaugh allegedly did is so terrible. It’s also because making a show of just how terrible it is on the world stage might help stop other men from perpetrating similar abuses.

We’re pretty sure Newman mistakenly italicized the wrong word; it should read, “not just because what Kavanaugh allegedly did is so terrible.”

So by denying him due process and making an example of Kavanaugh, men will learn the lesson that rape is bad? Don’t prison sentences for actual convicted rapists already serve as a better deterrent?