Brett Kavanaugh is a radical, according to the Washington Post. Two American guys who work for European outfits have decided they can use computers to analyze data and from that data conclude just how radical someone is. And what is the big tip off of Kavanaugh's radicalism?
He justified his decisions with conservative doctrines far more than his colleagues, citing politicized precedents consistent with other Republican-appointed judges, invoking the original Articles of the Constitution (consistent with the Originalist jurisprudence favored by conservative jurists) and using the language of economics and free markets.
That's right folks. He cites the articles of the Constitution. Game over.
Also, the same authors have concluded that Samuel Alito is on the "conservative fringe" because he is at the top of a chart that leaves off John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas.
For perspective, Kavanaugh has authored over 300 opinions during his time on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court has adopted Kavanaugh's reasoning eleven times directly, which is actually a pretty impressive feat. In other words, Kavanaugh is so radical that's shaped American constitutional jurisprudence directly in significant ways.
It is laughable to begin with that "data scientists" think they can use data to determine something like this, which is inherently subjective. But it is more laughable to conclude a guy who is highly respected in legal circles and who has had an enormous influence on American constitutional law without even being on the Supreme Court is somehow a radical.
Perhaps this study is more a reflection of the authors than Kavanaugh.