Yes. And unlike Jorge and his Justice John "Obamacare" Roberts.
Posted on 11/17/2017 9:56:10 PM PST by EliRoom8
Many voters who said they had reservations about supporting Donald Trump for president cited the U.S. Supreme Court as the No. 1 reason they chose him over Democratic Party nominee Hillary Clinton.
If their desire was to see the court filled with justices who share the judicial philosophy of the late Antonin Scalia, they must be pleased with the record so far of Justice Neil Gorsuch and the pledge the Trump appointee made at a dinner Thursday night in honor of Scalia.
“Tonight I can report that a person can be both a publicly committed originalist and textualist and be confirmed to the Supreme Court of the United States,” Gorsuch said at the dinner, held by the Federalist Society at Union Station in Washington, D.C., the Washington Examiner reported.
“Originalism has regained its place at the table … textualism has triumphed … and neither one is going anywhere on my watch.”
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
I believe history will record that President Trump saved the Republic with this nomination. (Sorry, Merick Garland...)
Just be sure to follow Thomas’s views on the Commerce Clause, not Scalia’s.
If Trump did nothing else, dayenu.
Thomas is the finest jurist on that bench, IMO.
I wish all of the justices were clones of Thomas :-)
One more and we can ask them to affirm the founders definition of natural born citizen.
The current court would undoubtedly find Anwar Al-Awlaki’s kids eligible.
Just be sure to follow Thomas’s views on the Commerce Clause, not Scalia’s.
Yes. And unlike Jorge and his Justice John "Obamacare" Roberts.
Yeb! was supposed to be the smart one.......lol
I am a believer in an organic breathing changeable Constitution.
So was our founding fathers. They knew that they wouldn’t be able to foresee everything and so they placed in the Constitution a method that would allow it to breathe and change. So if “it” isn’t specifically written in text and understood in the original as there, then the Constitution can be amended to allow it to breathe and change. For example, Healthcare. It is not in the Constitution text and needs an amendment to give the federal govt authority over it.
It’s almost like the rats had Scalia killed for nothing!!
I agree.
The problem is that leftists/liberal/democrats don’t believe the Constitution has a means to change. They believe that because it can’t be changed it needs to be reinterpreted, allowing it to breathe and change.
Most of the time I have this discussion with them and point out that the Constitution does allow for breathing and change, it is the amendment process. They usually go really? I go yea. Pass and amendment. Once they come to this understanding they usually say, well ok, but that would be cumbersome and difficult to do. I say it was intended to be that way, but if an amendment is really needed then it will pass.
So agreeing with them that the Constitution can change blows them away.
This would end up being a Christian worldview.
So it’s supposed to live and breathe the Holy Spirit. What it’s managed to live and breathe is demons.
The fact that congress and the executive have ceded so much of their power to SCROTUS, to make a supreme court justice appointment a make or break event, means our republic is gone already.
It needs to be pointed out that President Trump, the president who put Gorsuch on the supreme court voted for himself. President George H. W. Bush, the president who put the liberal David Souter on the Supreme Court, voted for Hillary Clinton. Think about that.
The rats offed Scalia in an attempt to pick up a conservative seat on the SCOTUS. They assumed that 0 would make the replacement selection and that they could get that appointment through before the end of his term, but even if it took longer, President H. R. Clinton would close the deal.
It would have worked to if Grassley and McConnell hadn't somewhere found a backbone (hard to tell what happened here) and ran out the clock on 0.
I'm one of those who pretty much voted for Trump specifically on the SC issue (2A entered into it also but the SC issue should fix the 2A matter).
I believe that there is a REALISTIC chance that Trump may select as many as 5 more SC judges before it's all said and done.
That would be a REAL return on investment and quite possibly the single greatest contribution that DJT could make toward saving the country.
Here is a truly evil thought....Trump should replace the American Bar Association “vetting” of Supreme Court justices with the Federalist Society.
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.