Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Who Attempted to Sanction Obama Eligibility Attorney on List of Supreme Court Nominees
The Post & Email ^ | June 27, 2018 | Sharon Rondeau

Posted on 06/28/2018 5:04:33 PM PDT by Elderberry

On Wednesday’s “Hannity” opening monologue, a list of judges on President Trump’s list to replace retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy was presented in a fast-running backdrop. A complete list can be found here.

Kennedy’s retirement, announced earlier on Wednesday, immediately spurred discussion as to who Trump might nominate to his seat. Constitutionally, all potential cabinet members and federal court nominees must be confirmed by a majority of the U.S. Senate.

The Senate currently consists of 51 Republicans, 47 Democrats, and two Independents. In November, one-third of the chamber will face re-election or replacement.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) is unlikely to cast a vote, as he has been absent from the Senate for several months due to serious illness.

At present, minus Kennedy, the Supreme Court contains what many view as four “liberal” justices and four “conservative” justices. Kennedy was often referred to as “the swing vote,” as the way he would opine on any given issue could not always be discerned in advance.

Early last year, Trump nominated Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals Justice Neil Gorsuch to the high court. Gorsuch’s seating has been touted by Trump as one of his greatest accomplishments thus far.

One of the names on the list is Sen. Mike Lee (R) of Utah, another is Thomas Hardiman, who was reportedly on Trump’s “short list” of contenders when Gorsuch was chosen.

Hardiman currently sits on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and was one of a three-judge panel which rejected as “frivolous” an appeal in a case dealing with the issue of presidential eligibility stemming from the election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008.

The appeal, submitted by plaintiffs’ attorney Mario Apuzzo of New Jersey, consisted of a 95-page brief challenging a lower court’s finding that the question of presidential eligibility is a “political” one.

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


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: birthers; hardiman; obstructionofjustice; replacekennedy; scotus; trumpscotusnominee
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last
To: Lurkinanloomin

I’d say SCOTUS has done a good job recently


41 posted on 06/28/2018 8:14:00 PM PDT by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Lurkinanloomin

Plus the fact that fidelity to the constitution is what we want

I don’t trust Lee. His Mormonism is no better than if he were a muslim


42 posted on 06/28/2018 8:15:20 PM PDT by Nifster (I see puppy dogs in the clouds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

I tend to agree, but maybe we should save her for Ruth Buzzi’s replacement?


43 posted on 06/28/2018 9:19:54 PM PDT by PlateOfShrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

My bet-

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-06-27/trump-says-search-for-kennedy-replacement-to-begin-immediately


44 posted on 06/28/2018 10:45:20 PM PDT by matthew fuller (How many of today's voters have ever seen a half-dollar coin (or silver dollar)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: b4me

I agree that we have more than enough women right now.


45 posted on 06/28/2018 10:57:13 PM PDT by matthew fuller (How many of today's voters have ever seen a half-dollar coin (or silver dollar)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Balding_Eagle

I agree. Or he’s vegetative and on
life support. I’m wondering what
political game the left is
planning with his demise.


46 posted on 06/28/2018 10:57:39 PM PDT by Lean-Right (Eat More Moose)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry; bitt; LucyT; null and void; Cold Case Posse Supporter; Flotsam_Jetsome; ...

Ping to potential SCOTUS pick who attempted to sanction Mario Apuzzo during an appeal of Barry’s NBC eligibility for making a frivolous appeal!

“Hardiman currently sits on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and was one of a three-judge panel which rejected as ‘frivolous’ an appeal in a case dealing with the issue of presidential eligibility stemming from the election of Barack Hussein Obama in 2008.”


47 posted on 06/28/2018 11:24:47 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

Here is my pick:

Amy Coney Barrett of Indiana, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
********************************************************

She’d be my pick also.


48 posted on 06/29/2018 12:06:34 AM PDT by House Atreides (BOYCOTT the NFL, its products and players 100% - PERMANENTLY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: b4me

+1


49 posted on 06/29/2018 1:34:12 AM PDT by Bikkuri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

Thumbs up! I agree.


50 posted on 06/29/2018 4:53:37 AM PDT by octex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nifster

I don’t trust Lee. His Mormonism is no better than if he were a muslim
*************************************
I tend to agree. Flake has proven that and Lee is right behind him. ....Saw an item on FR yesterday that was quoting Lee stating things that were clearly anti-Trump a couple of years ago. ....Don’t understand why Cruz is a Lee supporter...


51 posted on 06/29/2018 5:20:49 AM PDT by octex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: matthew fuller

bkmk


52 posted on 06/29/2018 5:23:22 AM PDT by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: PlateOfShrimp

No. I’d rather Trump stick it to the Dim’s early with a female he knows they hate. And she’s the youngest on his list. And she’s a Federalist member. Trump could replace Ginzberg later with a man and then watch them scream again. 1st because he gave us a woman they hate, and then because he does not recognize a seat as “reserved” for a particular “racial”, “minority” or gender category. I say “disrupt” the judicial order, because WE ARE THE RESISTANCE.


53 posted on 06/29/2018 5:42:03 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

“But what are her position about 2nd amendment? And judicial legislating?”

1. Do you know what the positions on those issues are for any of the other candidates.

2. I know she is a member of the Federalist Society. I know the Federalist Society is made up of folks with majorities in the Scalia mold. You can look them up and check out their positions.

https://fedsoc.org/


54 posted on 06/29/2018 5:51:13 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

Good points all. I agree, we need to go full Kurt Schlichter on them.


55 posted on 06/29/2018 5:58:54 AM PDT by PlateOfShrimp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

I hate the word litmus test as it has been misused but we do need to know if the nominee has ever had or been around guns, if they believe that the 2nd amend is equal to 1st. Even Scalia was a bit conflicting on this. Too many of our east coast and city judges have never had a gun, are too easy to minimize the 2nd amendment. Otherwise Heller, for example would have been used to knock down the gun control laws now in place and being enacted.


56 posted on 06/29/2018 6:08:31 AM PDT by Reno89519 (No Amnesty! No Catch-and-Release! Just Say No to All Illegal Aliens! Arrest & Deport!y)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Elderberry

I do not know the author of this piece, meaning I do not know whether she is a reliable conservative commentator or not.

I read the whole piece, and did not see any analysis of why the attempt to sanction was undertaken, except for the nebulous “standing” issue. What I would like to know is whether the standing issue was part of the original dismissal (at trial level), and whether the sanction would have been supported in law at the appeals level. Only the complainant’s viewpoint was included in this article, so I have no information to determine whether the sanction was judicial activism, or whether is was well within the established boundaries of the law as applied at the appellate level.


57 posted on 06/29/2018 6:09:05 AM PDT by MortMan (The white board is a remarkable invention.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reno89519

Defending “gun rights” does not require any experience with guns. The issue is the Second Amendment, fealty to what the Constitution says, respecting the separation of powers and not legislating from the bench. Those are Conservative legal values a good Conservative judge weaves into their jurisprudence on any case before them, whether it be “gun rights” or something else. To a good Surpreme Court judge, gun rights, or abortion, or eminent domain, or others are not entirely unrelated issues as far as how they should view the CONSTITUTIONAL aspect of issues.

A very good question to ask is “Do you believe in something called the “living Constitution”? That is an invention of Leftist activist judges to defend their denial of our written Constitution to instead favor their own mondern view. To a Conservative legal mind, the “living Constitution” is disrespectful of the only approved Constitution - the one we the people adopted including all the amendments we the people adopted, and it is a denial of the separation of powers demanded by the Constitution, because changing that Constitution is not given to judges, it must come up from the people and enacted in our legislative processes.

If a legal person says to me they deny the so-called “living Constitution”, I have some confidence they accept the 2nd Amendment as you and I think of it.

Let’s see if any of our GOP Senators have the gonads to stick to the Dims by asking our judicial nominees “do you believe in the so-called living Constitution”.


58 posted on 06/29/2018 6:24:27 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Wuli
I second your nomination.

FReegards!

Image and video hosting by TinyPic Image and video hosting by TinyPic

59 posted on 06/29/2018 6:39:39 AM PDT by Agamemnon (Darwinism is the glue that holds liberalism together)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ATOMIC_PUNK
Thanks for the list

In 2012, Judge Ryan joined the court majority when it found that it did not have jurisdiction to order disclosure of trial documents from the Chelsea Manning court-martial.
60 posted on 06/29/2018 7:38:04 AM PDT by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-76 next last

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
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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