Posted on 01/03/2017 2:51:05 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
Donald Trump has narrowed his short list for his first Supreme Court pick down to roughly a half-dozen finalists but the president-elect and his top advisers are already thinking about a second selection, as they seek to quickly remodel the high court with a reliably conservative bent.
Trump’s team wants to make filling the seat held by the late Justice Antonin Scalia one of the earliest acts of his presidency, according to multiple transition officials, in hopes of scoring an energizing and unifying victory for the conservative movement.
.
. And as Trump weighs perhaps the most enduring personnel decision he’ll make as president-elect — filing one of only nine lifetime seats on the high court — he has sought input from an array of friends, former rivals, and legal and TV personalities.
“He clearly understands he may have a chance to define the court for a generation or more and he is taking it very seriously,” said former Speaker Newt Gingrich, a Trump confidante.
While Scalia’s seat is the only current opening, Trump’s advisers are plotting how to fill that vacancy in tandem with the next one — a slot if vacated by a liberal justice like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 83, or swing-vote Justice Anthony Kennedy, 80, could far more dramatically move the court’s political center of gravity to the right.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
This will perhaps be his most important appointment. Supreme Court appointments are lifetime and could shape the nation’s legal doctrine for generations.
Ted Cruz and Mark Levin?...................
Probably an experienced judge, someone who knows how to work the system and get others to agree with his or her rulings.
Janice. Rogers. Brown.
Politico - all I needed to read.
Supreme Court appointments are not “lifetime” appointments. Per the Constitution they are appointments for the “duration of good behavior”.
All Congress members also swear an oath to protect the Constitution from enemies foreign and domestic. I propose that violating the Constitution by legislating from the bench is “bad behavior” and should be met with impeachment or whatever term is appropriate for removing a Justice.
Though the Supreme Court set a precedent establishing itself as the final word on all things Constitutional, it is not a constitutional fact. It has just apparently never occurred to anyone to question it.
It’s time to do just that.
Janice Rogers brown is a terrific lady, but she’ll be 68 this year.
Of course, if she was blessed with John Paul Stevens’ longevity (97 in April), she could be on the bench for 3 decades.
Pick someone Very Conservative.
Then signal that if his selection is not approved, then the Extremely Conservative backup will be nominated. And so on, until a Radical Conservative is confirmed.
God, I hope so. I'll settle for 5 Scalias and 4 Thomases.
Can the POTUS demote Roberts to Associate Justice, and make Clarence Thomas Chief Justice?
“This will perhaps be his most important appointment. Supreme Court appointments are >>lifetime<< and could shape the nation’s legal doctrine for generations.”
The Don is changing this. EVERYONE will serve at his pleasure.
Yes, Lord!
William Pryor to replace Scalia.
Diane Sykes to replace RBG.
I hope you are joking, neither one of them know what natural born citizen means.
What he/she says.
Plotting? Seriously?
He should speak with Thomas.
I guess Sykes is a good judge, but it would be worth it just to shut her husband’s pie-hole after all his anti-Trump nonsense.
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.