JUSTICE KENNEDY ANNOUNCES RETIREMENT

[IVC]

Originally Posted by AKSOG

We don't need Ginsberg gone but it would certainly help.

You can imagine how much stress for the Democrats is the Trump's second term. Not only Ginsburg, but Breyer as well. And we are not talking about them willingly going...

[cockedandglocked]

Originally Posted by AKSOG

This is what we needed. We don't need Ginsberg gone but it would certainly help. Having a conservative majority should also keep some of the lower courts living in the liberal wild west in check considerably more.

We do need Ginsberg gone... Here's why.

Kennedy getting replaced means we have a majority for maybe a couple of years.

Ginsberg getting replaced means we'd have a majority for possibly the rest of our lives.

I don't wish the woman any harm, I sincerely hope that she lives many more years..... in retirement, sipping margaritas on a beach somewhere, not sitting on the bench trampling on our rights. Retire already, lady!


As a runner-up prize, I'll settle for Breyer retiring if Ginsberg doesn't.

[AKSOG]

Originally Posted by IVC

You can imagine how much stress for the Democrats is the Trump's second term. Not only Ginsburg, but Breyer as well. And we are not talking about them willingly going...

Not to mention I cant imagine how much RBG is kicking herself in the *** right about now. At least two years of writing dissents at her age sounds like hell.

[AKSOG]

Originally Posted by cockedandglocked

We do need Ginsberg gone... Here's why.

Kennedy getting replaced means we have a majority for maybe a couple of years.

Ginsberg getting replaced means we'd have a majority for possibly the rest of our lives.

I don't wish the woman any harm, I sincerely hope that she lives many more years..... in retirement, sipping margaritas on a beach somewhere, not sitting on the bench trampling on our rights. Retire already, lady!


As a runner-up prize, I'll settle for Breyer retiring if Ginsberg doesn't.

SANS an unforeseen death I think we have control for a good decade. I doubt Thomas would bail on a Republican majority with a democrat in office if he could help it. A lot can happen in that time. Most importantly people like Newsom can be put in check and we can finally get some 2A certs with good review.

[cockedandglocked]

Originally Posted by AKSOG

Not to mention I cant imagine how much RBG is kicking herself in the *** right about now. At least two years of writing dissents at her age sounds like hell.

Not retiring while Obama still had a couple years left in office was about the dumbest/greediest (and best for us) thing she's ever done in her life. She's so dead-set on becoming the longest-serving justice that she's completely OK with throwing her own party under the bus to make it happen.

[SimpleCountryActuary]

Originally Posted by cockedandglocked

Not retiring while Obama still had a couple years left in office was about the dumbest/greediest (and best for us) thing she's ever done in her life. She's so dead-set on becoming the longest-serving justice that she's completely OK with throwing her own party under the bus to make it happen.

You say that as if it were a bad thing.

[tenemae]

There are various articles circling in the left-wing media outlets that Trump worked for months to convince Kennedy that his replacement was in good hands. Which I don't necessarily doubt. Getting any Justice to trust Trump's judgement (given the public perception of Trump's competence) was a long shot.

The fact that the far left caricaturizes Trump as a bumbling baffoon is only helping him slip under the radar and be even more effective at implementing his plans

My vote for him is almost completely justified now (assuming 2 supreme court picks for a pro-2A majority)

[Paladin]

cross post, but appropriate

Originally Posted by Paladin

McConnell said a day or two ago that he expects the new justice to be on the Bench by Nov 6th elections.

Going from the linked article below, I expect the nominee to be announced before Trump leaves for Europe. July & Aug will be spent with "meet & greet" Q&A between nominee and various Senators. Official hearings and vote will be in Sept. Nominee will be on the Bench to start the Court's new term come first Monday in Oct.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Labor-Day.html

Of course, that is the Dems' worst nightmare, so they'll do everything they can to derail it. But given how many Dem senate candidates are running in states Trump won, they can't get too extreme. IOW, they're caught between a rock and a hard place....

There is a God after all!

[Paladin]

Originally Posted by tenemae

There are various articles circling in the left-wing media outlets that Trump worked for months to convince Kennedy that his replacement was in good hands. Which I don't necessarily doubt. Getting any Justice to trust Trump's judgement (given the public perception of Trump's competence) was a long shot.

The fact that the far left caricaturizes Trump as a bumbling baffoon is only helping him slip under the radar and be even more effective at implementing his plans

My vote for him is almost completely justified now (assuming 2 supreme court picks for a pro-2A majority)

I think Trump choosing a man whom Kennedy had chosen for an intern (Gorsuch), paid back dividends this week.

[Kukuforguns]

Originally Posted by IVC

Trump will pick not only based on qualifications, but also on the ability to minimize the drama.

Are we talking about the same President Trump? Avoid drama? He steers for drama. This appointment will be dramatic no matter what. Did you see the drama for Gorsuch - who did not alter the makeup of the Court? This appointment will (likely) drastically alter the makeup of the Court. The drama is going to go through the roof.

[Kukuforguns]

Originally Posted by speedrrracer

The biggest risk here is the classic R stupidity of appointing a moderate to appease the Ds -- another Souter or OConner.

The nomination of moderates was the result of the previously existing Senate rule requiring 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. In order to obtain the votes needed overcome a filibuster, presidents had to nominate relatively mainstream candidates. That all went out the window when Sen. Reid invoked the nuclear option. From now on, you will see moderate nominations only when the President and the Senate majority are of different parties. If the parties are the same, the President will nominate his ideal candidate (with some behind the scenes consultation with the Senate majority leader).

[speedrrracer]

Originally Posted by Kukuforguns

The nomination of moderates was the result of the previously existing Senate rule requiring 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. In order to obtain the votes needed overcome a filibuster, presidents had to nominate relatively mainstream candidates. That all went out the window when Sen. Reid invoked the nuclear option. From now on, you will see moderate nominations only when the President and the Senate majority are of different parties. If the parties are the same, the President will nominate his ideal candidate (with some behind the scenes consultation with the Senate majority leader).

Then how did RBG ever get seated? Are we supposed to believe she is a moderate? Or Breyer?

[ja308]

Originally Posted by Kokopelli

I hope Trump has Sarah Huckabee Sanders make the announcement of his SCOTUS choice live in front of the Red Hen restaurant.

Great thought although recent developments including a man arrested for throwing chicken excrement against the Red Hen shows the Red Hen will soon be the boarded up Dead Hen !


MAGA

[DonFerrando]

Word is that a nominee will be announced on July 9th. Two women on the short list.

[Kukuforguns]

Originally Posted by speedrrracer

Then how did RBG ever get seated? Are we supposed to believe she is a moderate? Or Breyer?

You are confusing what they are now with what they were considered then.

RBG was considered a moderate when she was nominated. Moreover, in 1993 the Senate was 57 Dem. and 43 GOP.

Breyer was appointed in 1994 when the Dems still had a commanding majority in the Senate.

[speedrrracer]

Originally Posted by Kukuforguns

You are confusing what they are now with what they were considered then.

RBG was considered a moderate when she was nominated. Moreover, in 1993 the Senate was 57 Dem. and 43 GOP.

Breyer was appointed in 1994 when the Dems still had a commanding majority in the Senate.

Confused, no, ignorant, yes

good info

[theLBC]

there should be no such thing as moderate, liberal or conservative justices.

interpret the damn law, without prejudice.

[MisterX9]

Originally Posted by cockedandglocked

She's so dead-set on becoming the longest-serving justice that she's completely OK with throwing her own party under the bus to make it happen.

If I did the math right she would need to serve almost another 12 years. Good luck with that.

[IVC]

Originally Posted by cockedandglocked

I don't wish the woman any harm, I sincerely hope that she lives many more years.....

You are a better man than I.

She is personally responsible for denying us our civil rights. Just because *she* doesn't see it as a civil right and just because *she* thinks it's outdated doesn't mean it is.

[MisterX9]

Originally Posted by IVC

You are a better man than I.

She is personally responsible for denying us our civil rights. Just because *she* doesn't see it as a civil right and just because *she* thinks it's outdated doesn't mean it is.

Your state government is responsible for denying you your civil rights. She is responsible for failing in her duty to protect them.

[IVC]

Originally Posted by Kukuforguns

Are we talking about the same President Trump? Avoid drama? He steers for drama.

You are correct, so let me rephrase what I was trying to say.

All other things being equal, Trump will choose someone who can pass the confirmation easier and who cannot be easily smeared. My guess is that it will be a woman judge with clean judicial record on any controversial issue.

It's much harder to pin "woman hater" on a woman. It's much harder to pin any ideological position on someone who has never been in the legislative branch. It's much harder to get any definite answer or any inconsistency about controversial issues if the judge in question hasn't addressed it in the past.

[IVC]

Originally Posted by MisterX9

Your state government is responsible for denying you your civil rights. She is responsible for failing in her duty to protect them.

Semantics. Either way, she is culpable and I don't have any warm or fuzzy feelings.

[DonFerrando]

I'm worried that Roberts now feels called upon to be the new swing vote and move more to the center to preserve the 'integrity of the court' or some bs like that.

[saigasaga]

This is exactly why I never understood the never Trumpers. Just for the Appointment of Judges alone...look at what has happened to our State and Country because of simple minded voting practices...I have never voted Democrat and really couldn't look myself in the mirror if I ever did based on what has happened to our Country. Election have consequences.... Trump winning has given us a very slim window to make a lasting difference in the courts. I honestly believe he is our last hope because of his fighting back nature, others wilt under intimidation. Hoping he will have at least one more SCOTUS appointment during his tenure besides this one...of course a leftest..

[Blade Gunner]

Originally Posted by DonFerrando

I'm worried that Roberts now feels called upon to be the new swing vote and move more to the center to preserve the 'integrity of the court' or some bs like that.

Given his vote on Obamacare, this is diffenetly a possibility.

[daveinwoodland]

[speedrrracer]

Originally Posted by DonFerrando

I'm worried that Roberts now feels called upon to be the new swing vote and move more to the center to preserve the 'integrity of the court' or some bs like that.

Move to the center? He's been there for some time.
Still, more replacements are needed to truly secure the 2A for generations. Roberts might be too wishy-washy, we still don't know where Gorsuch or the new pick will land on the 2A, and cases take many years to bubble up through the system, so even if those three are all where we want on the 2A, Thomas or even Alito might retire before the right cases come through.

[tenemae]

Originally Posted by speedrrracer

we still don't know where Gorsuch or the new pick will land on the 2A

I thought Gorsuch's stance was fairly clear when he joined Thomas in the dissent for refusing to hear Silvester v. Becerra.

[skyscraper]

Originally Posted by tenemae

I thought Gorsuch's stance was fairly clear when he joined Thomas in the dissent for refusing to hear Silvester v. Becerra.

This^^^

Pretty clear where he stands.

[Den60]

Originally Posted by Paladin

I think Trump choosing a man whom Kennedy had chosen for an intern (Gorsuch), paid back dividends this week.

Exactly.

[Jack Straw from Wichita]

[Kukuforguns]

Originally Posted by saigasaga

This is exactly why I never understood the never Trumpers. Just for the Appointment of Judges alone.....

Maybe because he is a compulsive liar and they didn't trust he would abide by his promise.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

[saigasaga]

Originally Posted by Kukuforguns

Maybe because he is a compulsive liar and they didn't trust he would abide by his promise.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Unfortunately like it or not with his inherent faults he was the only one standing between HRC winning and loading the courts with libs so my point stands... elections have consequences.

[pgg]

Originally Posted by Paladin

I think Trump choosing a man whom Kennedy had chosen for an intern (Gorsuch), paid back dividends this week.

For all the chaos of this administration, it appears Trump actually has some very shrewd and calculating advisers working on his court appointees. Doubly shocking that he's listening.

[tenemae]

Originally Posted by pgg

Doubly shocking that he's listening.

Perhaps, instead, it should be shocking that you let people convince you the man is a petulant, bumbling ignoramus so narcissistic he won't listen to the advice of expert counsel. The man has, after all, had a wildly successful career despite not possessing a structural engineering degree. Amazing the man could actually design buildings, no?

[gobler]

Originally Posted by tenemae

I thought Gorsuch's stance was fairly clear when he joined Thomas in the dissent for refusing to hear Silvester v. Becerra.

I believe that they could not secure at least a 5-4 vote. Rather then doing possible harm to the 2A they punted knowing Kennedy was about to retire?

"A true patriot will defend his country from its government.
Thomas Jefferson"

[gobler]

Just posted...
President Trump is choosing between two solid Justices

According to CBS News, President Trump has narrowed his potential Supreme Court Justice picks to two federal judges: D.C. Circuit Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Chicago Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett. Sources say that Trump will reveal his official nominee in just one week, ahead of Anthony Kennedy's retirement, which begins on July 31. CBS reports:

"A true patriot will defend his country from its government.
Thomas Jefferson"

[tenemae]

He'll pick the woman so that once the dems obstruct, he can play their game and label them misogynists.

[Sousuke]

Originally Posted by gobler

Just posted...
President Trump is choosing between two solid Justices



"A true patriot will defend his country from its government.
Thomas Jefferson"

Amy Coney Barrett has no track record regarding gun rights FYI. She is also openly hostile to Roe vs Wade which means at least 1 republican senator would rebel if she is nominated.

[cockedandglocked]

Originally Posted by tenemae

He'll pick the woman so that once the dems obstruct, he can play their game and label them misogynists.

Everyone thought McCain picking Sarah Palin as his running mate was a genius decision that would win him the election. Ultimately, the Republicans' ability to play the "you're a misogynist if you don't vote for the female ticket" card made no difference whatsoever.