Posted on 01/25/2016 8:03:19 AM PST by justlittleoleme
Liberals won't like it.
If Ted Cruz is elected president, he has big plans for the Supreme Court -- namely, picking extremely conservative candidates to fill any vacancies among the nine justices.
In an interview with Bloomberg, the Senator and former solicitor general from Texas said that Republicans are generally bad at picking nominees for the high court, and that he'd be different.
"Unlike many of the other candidates, I will be willing to spend the capital to ensure that every Supreme Court nominee that I put on the court is a principled judicial conservative," Cruz said.
As solicitor general, Bloomberg notes, Cruz argued in front of the court on behalf of his state.
Cruz specifically called out Chief Justice John Roberts, appointed by George W. Bush, and Anthony Kennedy, appointed by Ronald Reagan, as bad picks. Roberts has gotten a lot of flack among conservatives in recent years for voting to uphold Obamacare, while Kennedy was castigated by the right for writing the opinion this year to legalize gay marriage.
The next president will likely have a few vacancies to fill. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy will all be over 80 years old by election day, while Stephen Breyer will be 78.
So how would Cruz find truly conservative justices? He said he'd look for candidates with "a long paper trail as principled conservative jurists." This means jurists who've actually made decisions, rather than the sometimes more politically palatable candidates without as much of a record.
You bring up a good question: Who would Trump likely confer with about potential Supreme Court nominees?
[[Wish he could have inspired other Senators to feel the same....]]
How do you work miracles? Jesus and God and the apostles and early believers were the only ones who could work miracles
I left nothing out.
[[We were told that John Roberts was a principled, constitutional originalist. The perfect candidate. How did that work out?]]
He may well have been very conservative BEFORE he got corrupted by threats from the current POTUS
“So what, she moved here and became a US citizen.”
Cruz’s father did the same. Is there one law for the Trumps and another one for the family of Ted Cruz?
By your definition Cruz is also a natural born citizen.
[Cruz has become an idol to many of his supporters].
Did my post refer to TED CRUZ? I simply stated a truth. By the way, the same can be said of DONALD TRUMP.
“This is Ted Cruz’s Plan For the Supreme Court ... Liberals won’t like it.”
BTTT
I’m not saying what Cruz says here is wrong - just that using this as some kind of measuring stick for Cruz (or anyone, for that matter) is silly.
True dat. Also, people on this board may be forgetting about the fact that appointments are subject to the advice and consent of Congress. One has to be able to sell a candidate.
Was Cruz’a mother a naturalized citizen....?
....................................................
Did Cruz’s mother relinquish her citizenship? Why are Cruz’s records sealed?
Are you saying the mother’s natural born citizenship is worthless when she is out of the country?
Trump needs to assure us that his sister, a liberal pro-abort, would NOT be considered for a vacancy.
“Was Cruz’a mother a naturalized citizen....?”
She was born here....!
....................................................
Did Cruz’s mother relinquish her citizenship?
No she has always been a natural born American citizen.
Why are Cruz’s records sealed?
Which records and what is your source....?
We should absolutely nominate the most traditionalist, constitutionalist conservative candidate we can. And we should fight like hell to get that person confirmed.
We just can’t guarantee they’ll remain that way once on the Court. That’s why I think using this as some measuring stick when choosing for which candidate to vote is silly.
I consistently tell the TRUTH! Like it or lump it. Perhaaps once in a while you should check the FACTS!
Roberts should be impeached.
I hope Cruz--or whoever is President--will appoint Ann Coulter and Mark Levin.
You may want to back up a bit on your claim to truth ownership, given your newbie status. Trump has a longer record for some of his positions than you do.
Everything contingent on a senate that votes approval ... otherwise ... you can nominate all you want
But Bush did give us Thomas.
I think the concern is that she showed up on Canada’s voter rolls while they were in Calgary. So, the argument goes, she may have “become a Canadian” while they were there, and had the intent of staying forever.
But then they went back to the US and once back here, she changed her citizenship from Canada to the US.
I have no earthly idea if that is true. But I “think” that is the concern.
Um - “secure the border first†means that - build fences, increase border patrol, etc. Then Cruz would look at how to deal with the illegals. (So opposite of Reagan). And, Cruz as always been about upholding the current law. Which includes deporting illegals.
.......................................................
Deporting illegals? He tried to sell the idea of legalizing them so they would “come in out of the shadows.” He qualified them by saying they wouldn’t be voters. That of course would not preclude their children being voters.
HE AVOIDED any discussion of a wall, saying a discussion of it would “COME LATER.” So you cannot claim securinmg the border has anything to do with a wall, fences, etc. I suppose he meant to increase border patrol ....perhaps. But maybe he also meant to begin enforcing the law AS IT I
S WRITTEN After, of course, legalizing ALL the liens so they could “come in out of the Shadows.”
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.