Posted on 07/10/2018 8:20:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
I’ve got a piece up over at the Washington Post about the Brett Kavanaugh nomination. It was a safe choice — and an opportunity lost. There was a choice out there that fired the conservative imagination, the kind of choice that arguably only a Donald Trump would have the guts to make:
There was a moment, in the early afternoon of July 9, when conservatives contemplated the delightful possibility that they might witness the best possible version of President Trump — the man with the will (and flair for the dramatic) that would allow him to be bolder than the average Republican president. The best version of Trump would have been nominated Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
Would another Republican have the guts to put forward a nominee who would so clearly inflame the culture wars? Would another Republican president shatter the GOP nominee mold by selecting a mother of seven kids, an outspoken Christian and a graduate from a “normal” non-Ivy League law school? The base-motivating, electrifying pick was right there, in the palm of his hand.
Then, he went establishment. He chose a man that any Republican president would have nominated. He made the best safe choice he could: Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
This does not mean that Kavanaugh will be a bad justice. Over time, I think he’ll prove to be a solid (and perhaps even excellent) pick. And, over the next several weeks, we’ll see an avalanche of progressive attacks, many of them labeling even his best and most rigorous opinions “extremist” or “dangerous.” Kavanaugh will be an easy pick to defend. But it’s simply a fact that tonight my inbox is lighting up with responses — many of them from Trump supporters — expressing a sense of regret.
And to those saying, “Relax, it will be her next time,” we should remember all the passed-over judges who never, ever saw that “next time.” There’s zero guarantee that Trump will get another SCOTUS pick. We don’t know of any justices pondering retirement, and nobody should be ghoulish enough to predict any justice’s demise. Don’t for a moment think Ruth Bader Ginsburg will step down under President Trump. So, until proven otherwise, I stand by my assessment.
One final note: You wouldn’t believe how often conservative professionals ask my advice about how “open” to be on their CV’s, in their social media, and online about their conservative religious affiliations. Ever since Brendan Eich, there’s a palpable sense that there’s a stained-glass ceiling descending on certain professions (including law) restricting the upward mobility of orthodox Christians. Barrett’s nomination wouldn’t “just” have put an outstanding originalist on the Court for 30 years, it would have helped blunt the force of secular bigotry. The direct confrontation between an angry secular Left and an accomplished, poised Christian professional would have represented a culturally important moment.
But alas, it was not to be. Kavanaugh will be an excellent judge. In a more functional political system, he’d win confirmation by an overwhelming majority and not the slim margin he’ll likely receive. I’ll defend him vigorously from unfair critiques tomorrow, but tonight I join many conservatives in a slight sigh of regret. There was a better choice.
Wow, a whole year? And that's enough in your eyes to be ready for a (hopefully long) lifetime in the most important and influential long-term position on the planet? I'd prefer a bit more than one year's experience on any CV first, even for an assistant manager at Bennigan's.
Call me sexist if you must, but women tend to change too much over time. I've yet to see a consistent conservative female jurist over the long haul. I love the hopefulness of wanting a 46 year old (Hoosier!) female to write exceptionally-crafted Originalist opinions for 4+ decades at SCOTUS, but I do not see it happening.
PLEASE inform me of any that can act as a counter-example to my point here!!
Of course if Trump did pick Amy, the dick would have said he missed a GREAT CHANCE to pick Kavanaugh.
Exactly how many conservative female jurists are you familiar with to make your judgment?
And, by the same token, how many so-called conservative MALE jurists are you familiar with that turned out to be "consistent"?
RE: Of course if Trump did pick Amy, the dick would have said he missed a GREAT CHANCE to pick Kavanaugh.
I know David French from his writings well enough to know that he does not oppose Trump simply for the sake of opposing him. in other words, I don’t think he’ll do that, He simply prefers Barret as the one closest to Scalia’s thinking.
Uhmmmm
So you are thinking that:
1. Trump will only serve one term i.e. 2 more years
2. He will be replaced by a candidate you allude to but do not name
3. The “new” President of a party not named but I will assume since Trump is planning on a next You are in effect saying will be a Democrat
4. Further still if Trump gets his second term he will be in office for then next 6 years or so
5. At that point Buzzy will be 91 years old, close to 92 and you act like she is roller blading daily and will make it that far
Just trying to pull some info out of you as this is at least the second time you have posted this to me ridiculous idea, please share
RE: Wow, a whole year? And that’s enough in your eyes to be ready for a (hopefully long) lifetime in the most important and influential long-term position on the planet?
If the framers of the constitution wanted judges to be in the Supreme Court, they would have made that a requirement in the constitution.
They did not.
Barrett is well qualified because SHE KNOWS THE LAW AND TEACHES CONSTITUTIONAL LAW. She has also PRACTICED LAW.
Most of the cases that come to the SCOTUS rely on the correct INTERPRETATION OF THE CONSTITUTION. This is where a constitutionalist and someone who treats the text of the document seriously will be needed.
So, her experience as a Judge in the circuit court is helpful but not necessary.
And may I remind you — Clarence Thomas became a sitting judge in the Federal Court in March 6,1990.
He took over from William Brennan at the SCOTUS October 1991. That’s barely 1 1/2 years as a judge.
What then? He has become one of the best Justices we have seen for nearly 30 years.
Doesn’t really sound like a very wifely thing to request.
That Trump winning a 2nd term is extremely iffy sums it up.
Now NeverTrumper French is arguing that Trump isn’t Trumpian enough?
Amy will be on the SC. Don’t worry, folks. And this term, not next.
Prediction: by the time Trump hands over the keys in 2024, Breyer, Ginsberg and Sotomoyor will all be gone. Roberts will be the 2nd most liberal judge, behind Kagan.
Associate Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., who served from 1902 to 1932, retired at age 90, and was the oldest person ever to sit on the court. Oliver Wendell Holmes also retired close to 90 years old.
The average age when either a justice chose to step down or died is 69 although in the last few decades more justices have been in their early 80’s. Ruthie is 85 now. She will be 91 years, 7 months, 22 days on Nov 6th 2024.
I think POTUS Trump will get to fill her seat. Perhaps there will also be an amendment of the rules with an automatic graduation of Justices to a Senior Justice role advisory only, without a vote, at age 80. One can always dream.
Who knew liberals were that easy to please (smirk)?
Not at all unless you have a Liberal bend to you and wishful thinking IMHO
And just what has he done to not warrant a better than average chance to do so especially after 8 years of Obozo over 2 terms
You must not be following the same research I am and it’s not MSM
who they kidding......she cant even keep her eyes open at a presidential address live.....on broadcast tv
Mr. NeverTrump French has his brain right there, in the palm of his hand.
Many of us feel burned by Bush now, but at the time, he was the only game in town. You'd preferr Kavanaugh wouldn't have played the hand all conservatives were dealt in those years?
What does that have to do with anything relating to this thread?
Agree lots of work to do between now and then on voter fraud, SCOTUS picks and other things. Dems bench is weak but we must be in a command position to avoid the Bernie Bots and simpletons looking for a return to the glory days (whatever that means, free stuff?)
Wall and illegals, BIG issue and it will be built, funny thing is in parallel Europe is blowing up over open borders and the push against it is stronger every day
Interesting times indeed...
“I know David French from his writings well enough to know that he does not oppose Trump simply for the sake of opposing him.”
Well, has he said anything GOOD regarding Trump, or does he still think that Hillary would have been a better president?
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.