Posted on 07/02/2018 9:21:06 PM PDT by ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas
“She is one of those gal judges who will “grow” and “evolve” with the role. She is full of “compassion” and “for the children”. “
Trump should not nominate her. She is a so called “so called conservative professor” at Notre Dame a very liberal college, that even covered up religious artifacts to suit Obama. There is no or little record of her decisions from the bench.Did she go to Haiti to adopt children to enhance her resume’ with the MSM? Why not adopt poor American children, of which there are plenty. How will she stand on affirmative action and open borders? We know how the Catholic Church stands on these issues. Is she up to the everyday battles of the major decisions facing our country or will she fold as Sandra Day O’Connor? We need a stronger pick.
I am afraid Trump will cave and bring in a woman. Best case scenario is Trump nominates a Neil Gorsuch clone. My theme is no libertarians (Mike Lee) and no women. Since the courts are the Dems go to branch of government there is no margin for error in the Supreme Court. Who is that gasbag Senator from Maine? Olympia Snowe? This is when this senile critter gets to shine for the TV cameras. Unfortunately, as a swing vote she might influence Trump in the wrong direction.
Dittos on all you said! Don’t cave Trump! Don’t friiter away a Supreme Court nominee like George Bush loved to do. Remember when Bush was going to appoint his personal lawyer Harriet nobody whatever to the Supreme Court? Was this crazy or a Bushian drunken interlude or what?
_________
Miers started with Bush as personal lawyer - US news - The Changing ...
www.nbcnews.com/id/9577329/...court/t/miers-ties-bush-include-personal-lawyer/
Oct 3, 2005 - Supreme Court nominee described as very loyal to the president ... Harriet Miers, at the time staff secretary, is seen on Aug. ... In 2004, Bush appointed her White House counsel, calling her “a talented ... 1990s, he hired Miers to comb his background for anything derogatory that ... No one works harder.”.
Bush Nominates Longtime Friend and Attorney Harriet Miers for ...
https://www.democracynow.org/.../3/bush_nominates_longtime_friend_and_attorney
Oct 3, 2005 - President Bush has selected White House counsel Harriet Miers to replace ... as White House counsel and was formerly President Bush’s personal lawyer in Texas. ... President Reagan appointed Justice O’Connor to the Supreme Court. ... No one reaches a point in time such as this without tremendous ...
Great post. Thanks.
‘To make insane comments like “women tend to evolve” when history has shown no such thing.’
perhaps...but voting history has proven that females trend left, particularly since ‘social justice’ has been tagged as as a cultural virtue...
‘Having reservations about potential nominees is not quite the same as “Never Trump”.’
for some, having a morning coffee while not wearing a MAGA cap is NeverTrump...
Bingo! Great post!
‘I could care less if the nominee is straight or not, white or black or plaid, or a Patriots fan’
well, I couldn’t...
Why don’t you read some of Diane Sykes written opinions?
https://openjurist.org/453/f3d/853/christian-legal-society-v-e-walker-c-j
Her philosophy is absolutely consistent with Justice Scalia’s.
Do we have a nominee who is a Springsteen fan? If so, off with his head!
You may be caught up on this, but I’ll say it for anyone who might not know. The filibuster rule for Supreme Court justice confirmations is gone as of the Gorsuch appointment.
The Senate only needs a simple majority to confirm. And if I remember correctly, the Vice President can break a tie, if that happens.
Oh, and one more thing. Three Democrats in very pro-Trump states voted to confirm Gorsuch while knowing that many other Democrats would be angered or frustrated by their votes.
And it appears from the media that Democrats are focusing their noise against Barrett and the abortion issue. She might be harder to get confirmed than Kavanaugh or Kethledge. There’s also Thapar, but I haven’t found any record showing any decision on his part related to the Second Amendment, yet. Kavanaugh’s a big affirmative on the Second Amendment but nothing on Kethledge, yet, either (except one writer saying that he had been hunting).
What would be wrong with a libertarian Supreme Court justice? I would not want a libertarian in any state or local office, for they are wrong with respect to state and local governments enforcing public order and public morality. There is a serious need for laws banning abortion, restricting access to dangerous drugs, eliminating pornography, etc. However, these are, or should be, state and local matters, not Federal ones. With the Federal government becoming way too powerful and intrusive, a libertarian justice would be a force for returning to original intent and restricting Federal authority to those areas specifically delineated in the Constitution, e.g., foreign affairs, coinage of money, national defense, etc.
LOL! I catch your drift.
Also funny but morbid, speaking of heads, some of the threads almost resemble a time immediately before the English Civil War in a way.
Now I say this, "The Donald Delivers!" On matters of policy, I love what he is doing--with some possible doubts over trade policy. But when you get right down to it, I have begun to wonder if I was being scammed for years about the true nature of our trade agreements (just like I was lied to about so many other things). Mr. Trump is more credible than the Uniparty Elites right now.
Folks are getting all hung up on this. Trust me, you don’t clerk for Scalia and then magically start to drift left. It doesn’t happen.
O’Connor was a state appellate court judge, had not been a clerk at the Supreme Court, and was never in the originalist or textualist camp. Barrett is on record stating that Roe was wrong, that the Obamacare decision was wrong, etc.
Put it this way, she has gone farther on record in an originalist way than Gorsuch on some of these hot-button issues. And Gorsuch turned out fine.
I remember Freepers all worried that Gorsuch would go left because he was an Episcopalian. So far, that has been off the mark.
7 children, if that means anything, and to me, IT DOES....CBN had this article on her, says many Evangelicals like her, I was skeptical of her at first like many here...now, she is seemingly more solid.
Very qualified, very smart. I don’t look at her like a Sandra Day O’Conner. The selection process, thanks to Trump is now better. Republican presidents in the past spent 5 minutes picking a judge. Trump does everything the right way.
I think Barrett would be a great pick, and send the dems in a apoplexy.
Thomas Hardiman, take it to the bank.
Unfortunately, you may be right. Two of her kids are Haitian that she adopted. Looks to me like a lot of liberal virtue signaling. Also, as a very devout Catholic, how does she stand on the death penalty and the current Fake Pope's effort to destroy national borders? Particularly, how does she stand on the President's legal right to regulate immigration? I'd at least like to see her spend some time on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals where she could build a track record of decisions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.