Brett Kavanaugh

It’s hard to believe, as Matt Damon noted in his monologue in this week’s “Saturday Night Live,” that the actor of this summer’s “The Odyssey” has only guest hosted three times during his lengthy career. (In case you’re wondering, his frequent writing and acting partner Ben Affleck has hosted five times.)

That’s a shame because Damon checks all the boxes for what an A-list actor should do when they host the show: be super present, take every opportunity to do the silliest sketches without seeming uncomfortable, and bring at least some of their acting chops to bear to give otherwise lightweight sketches a little extra gravitas or emotion.

Damon did all that and helped start the show off with an extra jolt of energy by returning as Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in the cold open, along with last week’s ringer, Aziz Ansari as FBI Director Kash Patel.

Not every sketch worked, like an early Godzilla parody set in a command center that was simply a series of increasingly anticipated spit takes on poor Mikey Day. Things improved when Damon played himself in a pre-taped sketch about a movie made just for moms ahead of Mother’s Day; mom’s fantasy? No conflict among the kids and a blissful marriage to Matt Damon.

Damon also played one of a trio of middle-aged men (including Marcello Hernández and Kenan Thompson) constantly getting beat up by “tough guys” who are sometimes just children. He also played a frustrated dad in a strange cat litter commercial, a substitute teacher trying to get a classroom of students to dance (unsuccessfully) and, memorably, an auctioneer in a fight with his auctioneer wife (Sarah Sherman). In these sketches in particular, Damon’s acting skills helped elevate the characters he played, grounding them in sadness or frustration. It definitely helped.

The “Odyssey” might turn out to be the summer’s biggest movie hit. If that’s the case, let’s hope Matt Damon isn’t kept from hosting “SNL” for so long after this week’s solid job.

Musical guest Noah Kahan performed “The Great Divide” and “Doors.”

At Martin’s Tavern in Washington, D.C., Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (Colin Jost) returned yet again to shout-bark at those around him, brag about the Iran War he claims he started and, of course, talk about drinking alcohol. But this time, he was joined by his apparent drinking buddy Kavanaugh, who held a gavel and immediately ordered a “six-three decision” (six beers, three shots of Jameson whiskey). Glowing in their victories, Hegseth bellowed, “Can you believe I just started a war?” Kavanaugh replied, “Can you believe I ended abortion? Your body, my choice!” Kavanaugh went on to show off what at first looked like a dinosaur-shaped district map for Tennessee before revealing it’s his field sobriety test, when he was asked to draw a circle. Kavanaugh bemoaned the male loneliness crisis just before they were joined by Patel, who cried, “Does this bar take Kaaaaash?” Patel showed off the bourbon that bears his name. (“Somehow this is a real thing that I, the FBI director, have made. This is real!”) Kavanaugh revealed a secret: that the court is going to let Trump do a third term. “Trump found the original Constitution and on the end, he wrote, ‘Psych!’ ” The three ended the sketch by singing Chumbawamba’s “Tubthumbing” with its callouts of their drink orders.

Damon previewed his upcoming film, even though he had to mention several times that “The Odyssey” won’t be out for another nine weeks. He also had to break the news that the lovely “SNL” tradition of bringing on moms of cast members wouldn’t be happening this year due to Spirit Airlines shutting down. It turns out, after an audience member (“SNL” writer Jack Bensinger) asks, that only Hernández’s mom was able to make it. Damon then recorded a video message to moms out there for anyone who didn’t get a gift for them. “You deserve a night out… nine weekends from now,” he said, suggesting the movie would make a great date night.

Best sketch of the night: Do I hear best sketch of the night? Sold!

A sketch as gimmicky as this one — in which the premise is two auctioneers (Damon and Sherman) are having a marriage-ending fight — only works if the performers are up to the task, and luckily both Damon and Sherman navigated the super-fast dialogue expertly and without looking like they were eyeing cue cards the entire time. The two went back and forth, auctioneering a discussion about weight, infidelity, drinking, their sex life and, eventually, terms of their divorce in front of their four young sons (who, adorably, hold up little numbered signs. Yes, they were played by adult cast members.). Even for “SNL” and for the last-sketch-of-the-night slot, it was a bold sketch for live TV and Damon and Sherman expertly walked the tightrope on this one.

Also good: Your mom will only make it through 23 minutes of this

“SNL” is no stranger to spiky sketch comedy takes on motherhood: remember “Mom Jeans?” For this year’s Mother’s Day take, it presented “Mom: The Movie,” a film devoid of conflict or dramatic tension because “Moms have enough stress. Why not let them feel good for a day?” Ashley Padilla plays the mom in the film, enjoying argument-free time with her kids (Jeremy Culhane, Tommy Brennan and Veronika Slowikowska), who only deliver good news. She’s married to Matt Damon, making her Rhonda Damon, and they met when he noticed her giant turquoise necklace after a movie screening. The film is streaming where moms are expected to find it: on HomeGoods Plus.

‘Weekend Update’ winner: This ‘Update’ segment is bananas — the round kind

This week’s “Update” featured three guest segments. Hernández and Day played kamikaze dolphins who work for the government, giving them a sense of porpoise (their joke, not mine). Jane Wickline expressed her anger at people caring that she’s always late in a funny musical rant. But Culhane’s return as Tucker Carlson continued a dead-on impersonation that covered several topics, including the Met Gala’s wild outfits, the new Michael Jackson biopic, and why eating round bananas is less gay than eating traditionally shaped ones. Culhane’s impression is a thing of beauty, and this time it leaned harder into Carlson’s tendency to express things from a very white point of view. In describing ASAP Rocky’s pink robe from the Met Gala, he said the performer was, “Wearing my least favorite color … African-American.”

WASHINGTON, April 28 (UPI) — Supreme Court justices appeared divided Tuesday morning about whether a U.S. tech company can be held liable for aiding the Chinese government’s alleged torture of a spiritual minority.

The case is centers on whether practitioners in China of the Falun Gong religion — also called Falun Dafa — can sue California-based tech company Cisco Systems for aiding and abetting violations of the 18th-century Alien Tort Statute and the Torture Victim Protection Act, which was enacted in 1992.

Cisco attorney Kannon Shanmugam called for barring aiding and abetting liability. He argued that allowing liability to be implied would harm the government’s separation of power.

Much of Tuesday’s debate hinged on whether the statute’s 200-year-old “law of nations” wording was applicable to the relatively more modern concept of human rights abuses, as well as whether the first Congress meant for the victim protection act to include second liability for aiding and abetting torture.

The case marks the latest attempt to define the scope of the statue, which for over two centuries has allowed foreigners to bring lawsuits in U.S. courts for serious violations of international law.

More than 20 years ago, Cisco developed and sold to the Chinese government a surveillance system, which the government used to find, interrogate and allegedly torture Falun Gong practitioners.

During arguments for Cisco Systems Inc. vs. Doe I, some justices emphasized Cisco’s awareness of their technology’s role in persecution, while others said that including liability for aiding torture in the alien tort statue contradicted with historical precedent and had foreign policy risks.

But no clear majority converged around either position in the conservative majority court.

“We’ve maybe misled Congress into thinking, ‘Oh, we don’t need to do anything about these human rights things, the courts are taking care of it,'” Justice Brett Kavanaugh said.

“I’m concerned at a separation of powers level that we’re not really allowing suits to go forward, but Congress thinks we are because of a lack of clarity in our case law.”

Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson and Sotomayor appeared more supportive of those who brought forward the original lawsuit — several Chinese nationals and one U.S. citizen.

Addressing the wording of the Torture Victim Protection Act, Sotomayor told Shanmugam: “I’m not sure how you get to your position that ‘subjects to’ can’t mean aiding and abetting because command liability doesn’t necessarily require subjecting someone to the torture.”

“It makes someone who’s in a command position who knows of the torture and permits it to happen … aiding and abetting. We’ve defined aiding and abetting as an active step in permitting and encouraging the substantive act.”

The Alien Tort Statute grants federal district courts original jurisdiction over any civil action in which an alien sues for a tort “committed in violation of the law of nations or of a treaty of the United States.”

“What’s the point of previous [Supreme Court] decisions that determined U.S. corporations could be defendants?” said Sophia Cope, senior staff attorney at Electronic Frontier Foundation, who helped write an amicus brief in support of the Falun Gong members.

“Excluding second liability from the ATS would be a huge loophole for companies to sell services which are used for human rights violations.”

By rejecting judicially created aiding and abetting liability, the court would close the last major loophole that the plaintiffs’ lawyers have “exploited” to keep cases with such claims under the ATS and TVPA alive, said Cory Andrews, vice-president of litigation at the Washington Legal Foundation. The foundation submitted a brief in support of Cisco in February.

“It would reaffirm that the ATS is a narrow 1789 statute, not a modern vehicle for global human-rights enforcement,” Andrews said.

The case had its origins 15 years ago. In 2011, the plaintiffs — 13 Chinese nationals and one U.S. citizen — filed the original suit in the District Court for the Northern District of California, claiming they were targeted using Cisco’s technology and then detained and tortured.

The district court dismissed the claims, but it was brought to the Supreme Court after a panel of federal judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed in 2023 that the plaintiffs had met a legal threshold to continue with the lawsuit.

A decision is expected by the end of June.