Wow, surprising timing. He apparently doesn't mind Trump appointing his replacement? That is normally the thinking right, that they choose when to retire based upon who is in office at the time? Maybe they do not think like that so much and just look at their situation in life. These people do great public work and need to enjoy their lives and families.
How much longer can Ginsburg stay?
I’m not concerned about this. Anyone who can be considered as a Supreme Court judge has to have a proven track record of excellence and fairness. They may decide conservatively, but I have full confidence that they have the best interests of the US at heart, unlike the President.
all it takes is a case and one swing vote to overturn Roe.
or marriage equality
or environmental law
but ok
all it takes is a case and one swing vote to overturn Roe.
or marriage equality
or environmental lawbut ok
X2
You are so right, and don't be surprised to see how far right a whack job president and a poodle Congress (see conservative writer George Will) will be willing to take this country backwards.
Kennedy was appointed by Reagan in the final year of his 2nd term after his first nomination, Robert Bork, failed approval by the Senate. My how times have changed.
I’m not concerned about this. Anyone who can be considered as a Supreme Court judge has to have a proven track record of excellence and fairness. They may decide conservatively, but I have full confidence that they have the best interests of the US at heart, unlike the President.
Wow, look at Mister Confidence/Compromise here on this... So fair and rational thats encouraging. As long as the Constitution is followed as written, and not as interpreted, I will be happy with the nominee.
Liberals, we will be locking up the Senate now as well. This extra motivation is going to turn into a several seat advantage. MAGA!
I’m not concerned about this. Anyone who can be considered as a Supreme Court judge has to have a proven track record of excellence and fairness. They may decide conservatively, but I have full confidence that they have the best interests of the US at heart, unlike the President.
Wow, look at Mister Confidence/Compromise here on this... So fair and rational thats encouraging. As long as the Constitution is followed as written, and not as interpreted, I will be happy with the nominee.
Interesting that you should say this Goob... since you do not think the Constitution should be applied as written to illegal aliens with regard to the 5th and 6th amendments?
The Constitution applies to Citizens so what does this have to do with illegals? My point being I am a Constitutional originalist and not someone who wants to re-write it to todays standards.
The Constitution applies to Citizens so what does this have to do with illegals? My point being I am a Constitutional originalist and not someone who wants to re-write it to todays standards.
Where does it say in the 5th or 6th that it applies only to citizens?
Where does it say that it applies equally to non-citizens?
I'm not purposefully being a dick, I am just trying to show that everything is interpreted so somebody, a Republican appointee or a Democrat appointee, knows how to apply the law.
You are interpreting right now, incorrectly.
The 5th and 6th do not always have to apply for illegal aliens because of the expedited removal authority dating back 20+ years. But when expedited removal can't apply, "people" not citizens are entitled to rights if on US soil.
It is why I have ardently been against bringing enemy combatants and those captured off the battlefield to US prisons, because if they are in the US they have legal protections they shouldn't otherwise have as an enemy of the US from abroad.
Just seeing how you would answer. Everything must be interpreted, nothing can ever be exclusively at face value. If you aren't careful you could be accused of "re-writing it" to fit your standards.
I'm not purposefully being a dick, I am just trying to show that everything is interpreted so somebody, a Republican appointee or a Democrat appointee, knows how to apply the law.
You are interpreting right now, incorrectly.
The 5th and 6th do not always have to apply for illegal aliens because of the expedited removal authority dating back 20+ years. But when expedited removal can't apply, "people" not citizens are entitled to rights if on US soil.
It is why I have ardently been against bringing enemy combatants and those captured off the battlefield to US prisons, because if they are in the US they have legal protections they shouldn't otherwise have as an enemy of the US from abroad.
Just seeing how you would answer. Everything must be interpreted, nothing can ever be exclusively at face value. If you aren't careful you could be accused of "re-writing it" to fit your standards.
Exactly. Seems like everyone who likes to say they want the constitution followed has major issues with the First Ammendment. They are the first to complain about free speech (kneeling, flags, etc), unfair press, freedom of religion (for any religion except the one they follow), etc.
The same people who complained when Obama started to issue Executive Orders saying it was unconstitutional nevery say anything about Trump issuing them at a greater rate than Obama ever did.
I find it completely amazing and hypocritical to the extreme.
Wow, look at Mister Confidence/Compromise here on this... So fair and rational thats encouraging.
Wow, look at Mister Never Compromised Once here. So inflexible and irrational that's discouraging.
You, your pal Mule and your little ultraright cheerleading squad here have never said one thing in support of or even remotely praising anything other than extreme right wing views, policies, and politicians.
If you find fairness and compromise so encouraging, why don't you try it some time?
Even though I have zero confidence in Trump, I'll wait to see who he appoints before complaining.
Wow, look at Mister Confidence/Compromise here on this... So fair and rational thats encouraging. As long as the Constitution is followed as written, and not as interpreted, I will be happy with the nominee.
Thank you for agreeing that Trump doesn’t have the best interests of the US at heart. It would be rational and encouraging to have a President that puts the country first and not his personal social benefits. Based on his constant bashing of the US and praise for foreign dicatorships, and his treatment of the Office as a reality show, a vote for Trump is borderline treason IMO. Use common sense instead of reacting emotionally by supporting this disgrace.
As long as the Constitution is followed as written, and not as interpreted, I will be happy with the nominee.
This shows that you have zero knowledge of how the judicial system is intended to work. The sole purpose of having lawyers and judges is for them to interpret the written law, because the nature of our laws are inherently open to interpretation, hence the reason our Supreme Court judges always decide differently.
As long as the Constitution is followed as written, and not as interpreted, I will be happy with the nominee.
This shows that you have zero knowledge of how the judicial system is intended to work. The sole purpose of having lawyers and judges is for them to interpret the written law, because the nature of our laws are inherently open to interpretation, hence the reason our Supreme Court judges always decide differently.
Noone ever accused goober of being a deep thinker.
Talk About 'The Appearance of Corruption'
Anthony Kennedy and Donald Trump had a special relationship.
BY CHARLES P. PIERCE
JUN 29, 2018
“Wait. What?”
Or, more simply, “Wut?”
So let me begin by saying, “WTF? Wait. Wut?” From The New York Times:
One person who knows both men remarked on the affinity between Mr. Trump and Justice Kennedy, which is not obvious at first glance. Justice Kennedy is bookish and abstract, while Mr. Trump is earthy and direct. But they had a connection, one Mr. Trump was quick to note in the moments after his first address to Congress in February 2017. As he made his way out of the chamber, Mr. Trump paused to chat with the justice. “Say hello to your boy,” Mr. Trump said. “Special guy.”
Mr. Trump was apparently referring to Justice Kennedy’s son, Justin. The younger Mr. Kennedy spent more than a decade at Deutsche Bank, eventually rising to become the bank’s global head of real estate capital markets, and he worked closely with Mr. Trump when he was a real estate developer, according to two people with knowledge of his role. During Mr. Kennedy’s tenure, Deutsche Bank became Mr. Trump’s most important lender, dispensing well over $1 billion in loans to him for the renovation and construction of skyscrapers in New York and Chicago at a time other mainstream banks were wary of doing business with him because of his troubled business history.
Am I just naïve, or did I have a good reason for the way I just bounced my head off the wall?
Trump to Justice Kennedy: "That's very nice coming from you. And say hello to your boy, special guy."
Kennedy: "Your kids have been very nice to him."
Trump: "They love him, and they love him in New York. He's a great guy."
In truth, though, this gives me the best reason I ever had to print again one of Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy’s greatest hits.
We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. …The fact that speakers [i.e., donors] may have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that these officials are corrupt. … The appearance of influence or access, furthermore, will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.
Of course, it won’t.
Say hello to your boy. I hear he’s a special guy.
Too many coincidences here.
[Edited on 6/30/2018 by PhotoRon286]
It’s sad ain’t it. Swampy.
Hope its a a woman.
Hope its a a woman.
If it's a woman nominated by Trump, she will be no doubt be against a woman's right to choose.
Regardless of what potential justices say in front of Congress when being questioned on their views, they vote their ideology when making SC decisons.
Looks like there will be an announcement on Monday already.
Hopefully the Democrats block it and Jeff Flake keeps his word to block all Trump judicial nominees
They are all ready protesting even though there is no pick yet
Honorable Brett kavanauh
They are all ready protesting even though there is no pick yet
It is simple, goob. So simple that you should even understand it. The legality of the election is in question. Trump is under investigation for crimes that could eventually be heard by SCOTUS. The illegitimate president should not pick the judges that may decide his fate. Do you understand?
It looks like Dems will lose this one.
The 1st words from Brett Kavanaugh
Brett Kavanaugh: Mr. President, thank you. Throughout this process, I have witnessed firsthand your appreciation for the vital role of the American judiciary.
No president has ever consulted more widely or talked with more people from more backgrounds to seek input about a supreme court nomination. Mr. President, I am grateful to you, and I’m humbled by your confidence in me.
