Posted on 11/14/2016 5:23:11 PM PST by Olog-hai
This aged, battleax is busy acting in some stage play.
I hope POTUS Trump can replace her very soon with a 40-something, radical Right, strict Constitutionist. HAR!
Agreed...
The thing about the court is that it’s decisions last a long long time.
If you do put a 40 year old on the bench, you could easily get 40 years service out of them.
Then you have to consider that their final decisions will be on matters that may not be reviewed again for 50 years, if then.
This means you effectively get 90 or more years from a great Conservative judge on the court.
Putting a good person on the court now could affect our nation favorably until well after 2100.
Yup. And even with appointing young justices, you can’t be sure of how much time any of them will have on this earth, as with all of us.
The list Trump floated awhile back looked like a good pool to which to refer.
If the Republicans don't use the "nuclear option" that Harry Reid put in place, then why did we vote for Pubbies?
The Dims wanted a 51% majority during their reign and set up the Senate rules, sure they whine about using the same tactic against them. I say keep it going for USSC nominations and also cabinet members.
It's time to fight these socialists tooth and nail and use their own rules to install Constitutional Surpremes. I hope that President-elect Trump realizes that above all that is why many people voted for him. If the Republican Senate tries to play nice-nice (as always) and go back to 2/3rds for confirmation, then we need to let them know it's unacceptable and hold firm to the Dims 51%.
And none of the “moderate, middle of the road” crap, either!
We see what Washington dinner parties did to guys like Harry Blackmun and David Souter....
It must gall her that her decision to stay in power is likely to make for an honest Supreme Court.
She has been one of the most political of Supreme Court justices.
Not necessarily. Eisenhower appointed Douglas. Was it FDR who appointed Frankfurter?
She intends to hang on.
Boy ain’t she the snappy one. What did she do wake up from her nap and make this revelation?
Trump may very well get a chance to replace three of the justices. Scalia’s. And, Ginsberg & Kennedy.
I wouldn’t mind if Roberts resigned and DJT replaces the CJ-SCOTUS.
With Thomas, Alito, Roberts (notwithstanding Obamacare) there are three conservatives. Filling the Scalia vacancy makes 4. Filling Ginsburg makes 5. Swing vote Kennedy (80) and Liberal Breyer (78) are next up. If Trump/Pence get to fill those spots, it will make conservatives # 6 and 7. Good luck Kagan and Sotomayor. They can look up the word irrelevant in the dictionary and find their pictures there.
I too thought she was going to New Zealand.”””
Maybe the 7.8 earthquake changed her mind.
I hope you are right but I well remember some of the Republican Presidents picks that turned out to be just as liberal as the Dems picks. Remember Souter, Warren??Federal judicial appointments just went from bleak to super freak! - DoughtyOne
The quality of the justices confirmed is the product of the quality of the president nominating them and of the Senate confirming them. If either the President or the Senate is a zero, the confirmed justice will be likewise.Reagan nominated several justices. The first was O’Connor, a near-zero because he had promised a woman nominee. He did well - superbly, even - with Scalia. Because, Senate. His last pick was Kennedy, tho. Because, Senate.
P41 nominated Breyer, who was a cypher and proved to be a zero. Because, Senate. P41 also nominated Thomas - who very nearly was successfully borked. Because, Senate.
P43 nominated Roberts, something of a disappointment, and Miers - at which point conservatives rebelled, forcing a redo resulting in Alito. Because, Senate.
At present we have real hope, not only because of the present Senate, but because of the upcoming Senate after 2018. Of the 48 current Democrat Senators, 25 - over half! - are up for reelection in ’18. And ten of them are from states won by Trump. So it only remains for Trump to come through - and he ran on a list of (good, by all accounts) potential nominees. So a good Senate would, presumably, be able to get and approve a good nominee. As often as necessary.
I love the fact of the list; it was a risky move in the sense that each individual name on it constituted a potential target during the campaign. But the Democrats didn’t bite, and now they are stuck with a situation in which they coulda woulda shoulda attacked at least some of those nominees - but as it stands, response to any criticism of a nominee from that list can be, “Why didn’t you use that argument during the campaign??” Their perennial “out of the mainstream” claim is therefore off the table.
Actually the first two nominations should be Moore and Cruz.
Another thing that would really throw the Dems into chaos, is if during Trump’s first term, the older conservatives retire and are replaced with young, Strict Constitutional Judges.
The following is also suggested:
Separate Federal from State and Local elections.
Establish a uniform set of rules for Federal Elections across all states and territories.
Electoral College vote by how the voters in their Congressional District voted.
Require government issued photo ID’s (can be driver’s license with citizenship noted on the ID).
Return to one day for voting (a national holiday, suggest the 1st Saturday in November).
Establish strict guidelines for absentee voting.
No third party voter registration
Paper ballots
Then, and only then, maybe we can have faith in the election process.
Thank you for the link. I’ll bookmark that. I appreciate it.
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.