Posted on 06/28/2018 2:50:43 PM PDT by Ken H
There was a recent article that indicated Collins is looking for a justice who will uphold precedent to protect abortion. The obvious question for her is, “should the Koramatsu decision on Japanese internment be upheld?”
Any judicial appointee has to force them to consider whether a blanket inclination to uphold precedent is good. Human nature being what it is, horribly wrong decisions have been made in the past. Shouldn’t they be reversed?
“It’s all about the children” dontcha know, unless they’re the most helpless and innocent of all human beings, in their mothers’ wombs...
The Left decries the shooting of kids by other kids in schools (as we all should), yet maintains the “right” to abortion on demand must be defended and preserved at all cost...Otherwise, unborn human babies might live...Huh?(Sarc/Off)
Supreme Court Justices ranked in order of whom I would like to have dinner with (which may surprise you)
Neil Gorsuch
John Roberts
Elena Kagan
Clarence Thomas
Samuel Alito
Stephen Breyer
Sonia Sotomayor & Ruth Ginsburg; sorry. No thanks.
I don’t need a court of black-robed hacks to tell me what my ancestors deeded to me with respect to my rights under the Second Amendment.
Clarence Thomas might rank higher on my list.
Roberts is a guy I’m not to thrilled with after his Obamacare decision.
Why did you pick Gorsuch first?
I don’t disagree with meeting Kagan, but she wouldn’t be a pick of mine.
Perhaps you could explain a few of these. I have no problem with your selection.
True, but it sure does make life better when government is on board:)
Gorsuch is first because he has written about his opposition to Substantive Due Process and willingness to restrict the doctrine of Chevron Deference. He is the most likely to be the new Scalia. I could listen to him for hours. I suspect Roberts is trying to forge a centrist coalition that produces narrow opinions which curb judicial activism and restores the Court as an arbiter of law and not a maker of policy. His Obamacare opinion is consistent with that philosophy. With Kagan I’d like to know the potential extent of her drift toward the center, whether she can take Breyer with her, and which center-right justice could lead her. I think she’s something of an enigma, which is why I’d like to meet her. Thomas follows in Hugo Black’s footsteps as favoring full incorporation of the Bill of Rights through the 14th Amendment Privileges and Immunities Clause, which is an interesting pairing of Justices. Based on that I already know what his opinion will say in Timbs v. Indiana next term regarding the 8th Amendment Excessive Fines Clause. While I’m reluctant to embrace the doctrine of full incorporation, I agree with him on most everything so I don’t have that many questions for him. Don’t get me wrong; I’d enjoy spending an evening with him, as I already do with like minded friends. With Alito I would discuss where he wants the line between religious beliefs and adherence to the law, but he is the justice about which I know the least. Maybe he’s the one I should meet.
The last two I find intellectually dishonest partisan hacks and dinner with them would be thoroughly unenjoyable. I’ll bet they’d serve something with a lot of green peppers which I despise.
Thanks or your thoughts on them.
My problem with Roberts was his snatching of a tax out of thin air. The Democrats had argued before the court that this was not a new tax.
He heard it, then said oh yes it is, and I agree with it.
That’s pretty hard to stomach.
I no longer care; if the goobers are ‘on board’ - great. If not, nothing changes for me.
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.