Posted on 06/30/2018 8:56:10 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
There's your problem. HARVARD AND YALE.
More than any other matter regarding the election of Donald Trump, the fact that he gets to select not one, not two, but maybe even three (See ya Ruth) Supreme Court Justices is the most important and long lasting legacy that thankfully, Hillary Clinton didn’t get a chance to do.
Can you imagine the insanity and depravity that would have ensued if Hillary had the opportunity to select 3 Supreme Court Justices? God is obviously watching over us, because in the end, good usually triumphs over evil and Hillary is as evil as it gets.
We should all call Yertl’s office and thank him in advance for aiding the president in getting another nominee confirmed. One call makes a lot more difference than many people think it does.
If Princeton only had a law school. Actually, they once did, many moons ago.
You can pack the Court via simple legislation by having Congress expand the number of justices (famously, there’s nothing in the Constitution that requires there to be nine) but any red-state Dem who voted for that would be public enemy number one back home. Electorally, it would be tantamount to a retirement announcement. They’d risk a backlash to be good soldiers for their party by voting to confirm a Democratic Court nominee, even if their constituents were grumpy about it, but voting to pack the Court to wrest the majority from Republicans would be an order of magnitude more transgressive than that. If Democrats are half-serious about this, they’ll need not just 50 votes but 50 votes from safe seats. That’s probably impossible.
Agreed. The turtle came through in a big way with Gorsuch.
With an even split and a floater all you have to do is remove one constitutionalist. RIP Justice Scalia
it is easier to list the Justices
that Trump won’t replace.
Kagan
Gorsuch
(maybe Roberts)
so Trump gets 6 (or 7) picks
True, plus as the Demonrats should know be careful what you wish for. Not nominating a SC justice during your last year in office as president, eliminating the filibuster et al were “implemented” when the Demonrats were in power. So expanding the number of SC justices, like these academic windbags from the left are suggesting, would more than likely come back and bite them in the ass.
Here is what I see going down, as outlined by Dan Bongino:
The Left is in a tight place.
Here is a problem for them: The election does not look like it will be a “Blue Wave”. It may not be a “Red Wave”, but it likely won’t be a “Blue Wave”.
So here is the thought process for the Left:
Their only chance is to take back the Senate. But that doesn’t look likely. They have (IIRC) at least six senators up for re-election in states that went for Donald Trump in 2016, so their states supported Donald Trump.
If there is vote for a new justice prior to the election and they vote down that selection in a state that went for Donald Trump, that may not go over well, and they could lose their seat due to the political fallout.
So, here is what Trump should do: Get two candidates on deck, one who is very conservative and reliable, and one who is over the top conservative, a “Leftist Nightmare of a Supreme Court Justice”.
Trump will put up the very conservative and reliable one for nomination prior to the 2018 election, with the very public knowledge (unsaid of course) that if that “reliable” candidate is rejected, after the election, the wildly radically conservative candidate will be nominated.
The Leftists then have a gamble to consider: Do they accept the less radical candidate and vote them in before the election, or do they wait until after the election, when some Leftist senators from states that Trump won may go down due to the backlash to the rejection, and now they don’t have a chance to pick off enough Republican Senators (such as Collins from Maine and Murkowski from Alaska, both of who are raging RINOs and can likely be counted on by the Left) to counter the Democrat Senators who lost.
So, either they accept a conservative nominee we like and can live with, or they gamble, hoping against hope to regain power in the election to thwart any nominee. If they lose, they will get a radical conservative nominee who will be shoved down their throats, and they are going to just have to take it with no recourse.
That is how I see it going down.
Elana Kagan could die tonight. No one gets out of here alive.
God knows. Accidents can happen, or things like Scalia had happen to him.
I am praying for more vacancies, either by person’s choice or God’s plans. My hope is the current 3 women are soon gone.
Why not the worst first when we have the most leverage? If it’s moving keep pushing.
How about Ted Cruz?
Ginsburg won’t last another 6 years.
And FWIW, Trump and the Constitution will come out winners regardless of who he nominates.
Plus we need more conservative/constitutionalist oriented judges at the federal level. For example on June 30 FEMA money for the Puerto Ricans displaced from Hurricane Irma was to expire no more government money. But a federal judge ruled against this and that the Puerto Rican’s displaced by Irma are to still receive FEMA money. It has been almost 10 months since Hurricane Irma and because of a judge we are to continue giving them money. Heck its already 2018 hurricane season. The Puerto Ricans displaced by Irma have had plenty of time and government assistance to get their life back in order.
I view it as politicians via judges trying to buy the votes of those Puerto Ricans in swing states like Florida, especially with current polls showing Rick Scott leading Bill Nelson.
concur. ivy league does not deserve a monopoly on legal interpretation. also could use some lawyers with practical experience.
Constitutionaly I like it. Logically I like him where he is. DJT has a great list of judges to pick from. No use letting a conservative senator go to waste. IMO. Gorsuch 2.0 is on the list along with 3.0 and 4.0.
We have leverage now because of the election. Let’s say no senate seats change hands...what will happen after the election?
Collins of Maine and Murkowski of Alaska always have to suspected and assume they will vote with the Rats.
Before the election, the Senators running for seats in purple or reddish leaning states need to vote carefully. If their electorate takes issue with the way they vote and Trump’s candidate gets turned down with their help, it could go bad for them election day. So we could very well overcome the loss of Collins and Murkowski’s vote in a straight up vote.
After the election there is no such pressure, and we can hope to gain a few more Republican seats and make it sure, but...we have to keep in mind the balance could change, and the Dems could be in charge.
I don’t think it will happen, but they don’t know what is going to happen either.
I do agree with you-keep the pressure on. Trump does have that Patton-Like streak in him!
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.