Skip to comments.Sotomayor, Kagan shift Supreme Court debates to the left
Posted on 12/25/2010 7:39:05 PM PST by Nachum
Washington For most of the last two decades, Supreme Court conservatives led by Justice Antonin Scalia dominated the debates during oral arguments. They greeted advocates for liberal causes with sharp and sometimes caustic questions, putting them on the defensive from the opening minute.But the tenor of the debate has changed in recent months, now that President Obama's two appointees to the court, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, have joined the fray and reenergized the liberal wing.Gone are the mismatches where the Scalia wing overshadowed reserved and soft-spoken liberals like now-retired
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
> reserved and soft-spoken liberals
What universe is this author from?
Most of the “liberals” I know are loud, conceited, self-important, pompous, braying jack-asses!
But they are probably as secret as Zero's birth certificate.
Quite frankly, I imagine the other justices privately shaking their heads at the juridical incompetence of these two affirmative action lightweights
Actually, as soon as 0bastard is deemed ineligilible and yanked off the stage, these gals (or whatever they are) need to be shown the door.
Null and voided.
“Most of the liberals I know are loud, conceited, self-important, pompous, braying jack-asses!”
“Most of the liberals I know are loud, conceited, self-important, pompous, braying jack-asses!”
SHEESH!!! I only hit post once. Sorry to all about that.
Horse sh**. The people they replaced were already as left as they could get. It is still 5-4.
In the World we live in, it will never happen.
What a crock of sh*t this article is ...
Cases aren’t decided during oral arguments. Orals are “dog and pony” shows for the public. Liberals don’t sway Conservatives or vice-versa in these public forums. Although, one can get the sense of the tenor of a case from each of the justices questions.
Most of the decisions are made [and possibly persuaded] during private meetings [usually one-on-one] between justices.
For example, in Brown v. Board of Education, Earl Warren decided that he needed a unanimous Court for the decision in order to send the message. The ruling was delayed by months so that he could personally persuade the Southern Conservatives on the Court to get on board.
More acid flashbacks to a past that existed only on the other side of the mirror.
What a joke. These two idiots only talk; they don’t reason, analyze or apply. They only talk. And they say whatever it is that useful idiots are supposed to say. I suppose that is worth some mention in the LA Times.
The Rats in the Senate are currently thinking about eliminating the filibuster so that they can fill as many federal courts with liberals in the two years Obastard has left.
In what other direction are 2 marxist lesbian pigs to go?
Good point, but David Souter was a mild and conflict-averse New England Yankee. No one can say the same for the egotistical Sonia Sotomayor, who replaced him.
It’s not that the views of the court have changed, but the tone has and it’s more combative.
Maybe the world you live in.
The world I live in, nothing lasts forever, karma is inescapable law (aka “as you sow, so shall you reap”) and the leftists are doomed. They will fight and claw and kick and scratch and bite.
But if people give up, as you apparently are ready to do right now, they merely assist the evil leftists.
Note my tagline.
Frankly, that’s why I wasn’t too upset by their appointments. They replaced libs, but they are inferior intellectually to the libs they replaced. That means the one swing vote, Kennedy, is being influenced by Scalia, Alito, Roberts, and Thomas one our side (monster intellects all) vs Kagan, Sotomayor, and (so dull I can’t recall) on the other.
We win that contest more often than not!
Yes, but the NYT’s is taking enjoyment in the new Justices preening before the cameras more then the ones they replaced. They’ve gone after Scalia many times for his nature but in truth if he’d been a liberal forthrightly and intelligently arguing for the cause he’d have been their favorite Justice. That these two hog camera time makes them happy even if they are nitwits.
I do have a fondness for them though. Neither of them have the ability or it seems desire to strike up a friendship with Kennedy. Neither of them are respectable Justices that are there for merit. As a result Kennedy is more open to persuasion from the conservative members of the court. If Obama were wise he’d have selected Justices Kennedy would respect and like to spend hours away from the court with.
Good! Hopefully with their big mouths, they will fully reveal who they are and what they stand for, all the while repulsing Justice Kennedy.
During oral augments, he will be sitting there thinking - “Damn, these bitches are crazy”, and will tune them out.
What? Do you mean to imply that there’s some other way to vote, other than one’s feeeelings?
Well. there you have it, they don't have a full brain between them. Liberals can and do make a lot of noise but that's about it.
The smack down that zero delivered to the conservative justices at the state of the union address is not going to help zero when Obama care comes before them.
I believe there will be 5 firm votes against Obama care.
Thats just the beginning of the process - after the preliminaries are passed around, they know where they initially stand. Thats when the persuading [politicking] begins. Based on what they saw in each "opinion", one coalition or the other will target whom they believe can be persuaded to change their mind ...
This is not a Vegas show. This is the USSC for criminy sakes.
The balance of the vote has not shifted...but there's a couple of libs on the court that I hope will hang on for just two more years. But, I don't think they will.
I'm thinking Obama will get three. Damnit.
The wise latina and mama Cass redux-—part of the leftist legacy of the Zero. The old GIGO principle in undeniable full effect.
I support televising every USSC deliberation. Every one. They could not vote or deliberate in private...and they would be sworn not to discuss the cases amongst themselves nor via any 1 on 1 communication...without the cameras rolling.
Ahh yes the Sununu stealth WEASEL Souter grasped firmly to the tassles of aunt Ruthies black robe while on the SC.
EVERYONE had better pray for the health of Tony Kennedy. and the right side of SCOTUS.
One more left-tard on the Court, replacing Roberts, Thomas, Scalia, Alito or Kennedy...and the nation is doomed judicially.
As long as Alito, Roberts, Thomas, Scalia and Kennedy stay alive.
Three don't change the composition of the Court - its the fourth [Kennedy] that I'm worried about.
He's [Kennedy] bad enuf as it is - but it would be worse if Obama got the 4th pick ...
What's the bet that the commies succeed.
One major difference between the Left and the Right is the Left’s determination to win. The Right likes to pretend it’s trying while selling out the constituency every chance it gets.
The GOP’s faux concern with these two Justices prior to their respective confirmations was simply deceitful and pathetic.
The GOP is full of pretenders.
Yea, they know how to win the game. Sorry to say but my side slinks down to obscurity & will/are eaten to death by the determined. We were given a republic but we couldn't keep it. Turn out the lights the party is over.
Smoke and mirrors. Roberts was put in place for specific strategies. The SCOTUS is not conservative, though it is posed as such, falsely. The court is assiting int he demise of the We The People Republic. Roberts is no conservative, he is an elitist helping to protect barry the bastard’s backside.
We were doomed when Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren. We’re still suffering from that one.
Now it’s just a matter of degree.
And then he named William Brennan who haunted us seemingly forever. Then Nixon named Blackmun, Ford named Stevens, and Bush named Souter.
With those appointments, who needs the Democrats? Although theirs are always goose stepping one hundred percent dependably communist, otherwise known as “moderates” in the press.
They will also have to change the rules for getting a nominee out of committee which requires that at least one member of the opposing party vote to bring the nominee to the full Senate. They know that liberal judges can do increase the damage by upholding their unconstitutional laws.
Actually, slim to none. The saner heads [if there are such things] in the DEM Party realize that someday they won't be in power. Then, as they say, payback is a bitch ...
If this government, including the courts, go any further left they’re going to fall off the edge of the planet.
It doesn’t take that much intellectual fire power to say: “We’re the liberals on the supreme court. We can do whatever we want. We don’t care if it’s not in the Constitution. We think it’s a good idea and that’s that.”
That’s the essential argument of the left in every really bad decision they have made for the last 50 years.
If anything, I hold-out hope that Sotomeyer or Kagan might just blow-up in Obama's face and one or both of these appointments just might see the imbalance that has occurred and take the side of the little guy (or states) for a change. If they don't, I'm still screwed and all doesn't end well, anyway.
Exactly! And if Ginsburg is replaced by an Obama nominee, we are not worse off either.
Are you trying to recall the whiny little ACLU lawyer Ginsberg?
Somebody please tell me why Kennedy is called a “conservative”.
In a blatant piece of activist judging, he wrote the majority opinion that gave captured foreign terrorists habeas corpus rights. In a landmark eminent domain case, he voted to give some citizen’s house away to a developer on the grounds that it would produce more tax revenue. You could be more conservative than that and be in Obama’s cabinet.