Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court Nominees: The Most Critical Issue Obama and Romney Have Not Discussed
Policy mic.com ^ | Nov 6, 2012 | Derek Miles

Posted on 11/07/2012 5:03:34 AM PST by KeyLargo

Supreme Court Nominees: The Most Critical Issue Obama and Romney Have Not Discussed

Derek Miles in Politics, Courts

Supreme Court Nominees The Most Critical Issue Obama and Romney Have Not Discussed

Upon leaving office, President Dwight D. Eisenhower was asked what the biggest mistake of his presidency was.

His reply was simple and telling “I made two. And they’re both sitting on the Supreme Court.” Whereas Eisenhower was relegated to a role of private citizen following his second term in office, his Supreme Court appointments remained on the bench for decades

It is this very reason that many believe that Supreme Court appointments are the most important decisions that are made by presidents during their time in office.

While the presidency is muddled with political battles waged in order to impede progress, the Supreme Court is bound only by the Constitution and federal laws. And, as was demonstrated to us over the summer with the Obamacare health care ruling, the buck often stops with the Supreme Court.

(Excerpt) Read more at policymic.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; liberals; obama; supremecourt
Now Obama will finally be able to load the Supreme Court with liberals and have his mandate to change America forever.


1 posted on 11/07/2012 5:03:42 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

My brother and I were just talking about this. Better pray none of our appointees die or retire.


2 posted on 11/07/2012 5:09:51 AM PST by beagleone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

This is going to kill us. I’m surprised this was not a bigger campaign issue. The whole ball of wax pretty much sucks.


3 posted on 11/07/2012 5:10:06 AM PST by GnL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

Eric Holder and Valerie Jarrett will probably be the next two appointees to the Supreme Court.

Certainly they will get support from Mitch McConnell.


4 posted on 11/07/2012 5:10:57 AM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

Once the balance on the SCOTUS is shifted to the liberals, expect a review of Heller and MacDonald that only allows posession of a firearm in your home and nowhere else without special permissions, licenses and massive fees.


5 posted on 11/07/2012 5:11:24 AM PST by Erik Latranyi (When religions have to beg the gov't for a waiver, we are already under socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beagleone
"Thanks John for all of your help. I look forward to your help with changing the 2nd Amendment."

Here's a FREE autographed copy of my book for you.

6 posted on 11/07/2012 5:15:09 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

Now we can look forward to Justice Jesse Jackson and Justice Maxine Waters.


7 posted on 11/07/2012 5:15:54 AM PST by aomagrat (Gun owners who vote for democrats are too stupid to own guns.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GnL
Count this as one more reason this was very inconsequential election. The makeup of the U.S. Supreme Court was not a major campaign issue because there wasn't much of a difference between the two candidates about their approach to appointing USSC justices.

P.S. This was why ObamaCare and Afghanistan weren't big campaign issues, either. Both candidates were on the same side of these issues.

8 posted on 11/07/2012 5:19:32 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: beagleone

I am not sure Mittens would have protected the constitution with his appointments but we know the African Muslim will not.


9 posted on 11/07/2012 5:26:32 AM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SaraJohnson

“I am not sure Mittens would have protected the constitution with his appointments but we know the African Muslim will not.”

well, Romney couldn’t make that argument for himself.


10 posted on 11/07/2012 5:29:55 AM PST by ari-freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

I would say the delightful cass sunstein is up next. He
just left his czar position a few months ago and i believe
this will be why.

I thought we would be like England in 40-50 years. Now i
see it will be about 10.


11 posted on 11/07/2012 5:33:25 AM PST by americas.best.days...
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aomagrat

Looking through the threads this morning... just makes me incredibly sad. The people here who worked hard to convince their fellow conservatives not to vote for Romney are beating their chests and patting themselves on the back. And as you say, “Now we can look forward to Justice Jesse Jackson and Justice Maxine Waters.” Too many people think that this is all just a game.


12 posted on 11/07/2012 5:34:07 AM PST by fireman15 (Check your facts before making ignorant statements.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo
" The Most Critical Issue Obama and Romney Have Not Discussed"

Say what? As of yesterday, Romney doesn't have any (expletiveofyourchoicefilledinhere) say in the matter.

Zero gets to put whichever communist dyke lesbian he wants on the court and she'll be rubberstamped by his Senate.

Kiss the constitution goodbye, what's left of it, and who was that guy... that guy that the Republican powersthatbe decided it was his turn now... oh yeah The Mittster... he's not in the loop on those decisions, but OTOH he's not hurting any at all, is he?

13 posted on 11/07/2012 5:40:32 AM PST by OKSooner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

A little late to worry about it now, isn’t it? We lost, we’re their victims from here on.


14 posted on 11/07/2012 5:41:28 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fireman15

Yes. I think is was one more factor of Romney losing because of those voers that based on their principals, and the Paulites chose to not vote for the top of the ticket at all.


15 posted on 11/07/2012 5:43:37 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

“A little late to worry about it now, isn’t it? We lost, we’re their victims from here on.”

The article was written before Obama was re-annointed.

When I went to a local gun shop and the man behind the counter said that he and many others would not vote for Romney, “because he is rich and will take away my social security”. I knew it was over.

I will most likely not renew my NRA membership and just concentrate on conserving my resources to take care of myself and my family.


16 posted on 11/07/2012 5:51:27 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

Somehow I doubt Romney would have appointed someone like Elena Kagan to the SCt. No way in hell.


17 posted on 11/07/2012 6:05:30 AM PST by GnL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

As if I am not feeling bad enough already, this reminder is another kick in the teeth.


18 posted on 11/07/2012 6:06:37 AM PST by PoloSec ( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo
This, this is the heart of the disaster that occurred last night. Obama can now freely remake the SC into a rubber-stamp for tyranny. There will be not even the pretense of nodding in the direction of the Founders' principles of liberty. The evil that will come of this will be without limit. There will be no political fix for this problem. This has set the stage for civil war at some point.
19 posted on 11/07/2012 6:14:41 AM PST by Paine in the Neck (Socialism consumes everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paine in the Neck

That is why many, many conservatives told others that at least vote for the chance that Romney would appoint Justices that would abide by the Constitution, knowing that Obama will appoint Justices that will not.

Future of an Aging Court Raises Stakes of Presidential Vote

The winner of the race for president will inherit a group of justices who frequently split 5 to 4 along ideological lines. That suggests that the next president could have a powerful impact if he gets to replace a justice of the opposing side.

“This election could shape the court for decades to come,” said Nan Aron, president of the Alliance for Justice, a liberal advocacy group.

It is, of course, impossible to predict when a vacancy will occur. (Justice John Paul Stevens spent 35 years on the court and retired at 90, while Justice Robert H. Jackson, who served in the 1940s and 1950s, died of a heart attack at 62.) A 2006 study in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy found that the average retirement age for justices was 78.7.

Justice Ginsburg, a stalwart of the court’s liberal bloc, has been treated for pancreatic cancer. Justice Antonin Scalia, the court’s most visible conservative, is 76. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, frequently the swing vote, is 75. And Justice Stephen G. Breyer, like Justice Ginsburg a Democratic appointee, is about to turn 74.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/us/presidential-election-could-reshape-an-aging-supreme-court.html?_r=0


20 posted on 11/07/2012 6:21:56 AM PST by KeyLargo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

Glad someone finally brought this up. There will be two seats coming open very soon. I have no doubt they will be filled with muslims or those with islamic leanings. I also have no doubt that on the more local levels, there will be cases decided with sharia law taken into consideration. After that, well...


21 posted on 11/07/2012 6:29:45 AM PST by bgill (We've passed the point of no return. Welcome to Al Amerika.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KeyLargo

Obama got 58 million votes. Romney got about 56 million. McCain got 59 Million. The paulites, mormon haters, and a scattering of others who love to morally posture stayed home.
The stay at homes just gave us Obama II. Had the ones who voted for McCain voted again, we would have won popularly AND electorially.


22 posted on 11/07/2012 8:13:54 AM PST by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GnL

You’re right. Romney would have nominated someone like David Souter to the Supreme Court, and within 3 years Souter would have been writing majority opinions that made Elena Kagan look like Clarence Thomas.


23 posted on 11/07/2012 3:56:29 PM PST by Alberta's Child ("If you touch my junk, I'm gonna have you arrested.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

I’ll take the “maybe-lib” over the “sure thing-lib” any day. You can take what you want. As it stands now, we will get the “sure thing-lib(s)” on the Court. Congratulations.


24 posted on 11/07/2012 4:15:39 PM PST by GnL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson