Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

We are at the threshhold of appointing a Judge to the Supreme Court who will replace the late Justice Scalia. This will give the court, once again, a 5-4 conservative advantage.

In essence, it puts the balance back the way it was before the unfortunate passing of Justice Scalia. However, with the election of President Trump, he could conceivably replace both Justices Breyer and Ginsburg, giving conservatives a huge lock on the USSC for decades! But it didn't have to be this way.

When Obama was elected, it was assured that with a pretty much solid Senate vote, he was going to be able to appoint as many liberal Judges as vacancies arose. This was the point at which Ginsburg and Breyer should have taken one for the team, and retired. It would have enabled Obama to appoint four solid leftists who would have been on the court for a very lengthy time.

At the time, it didn't make for much of a difference. But now, in hindsight, it was a dreadful miscalculation, and as I wrote before, it can give President Trump an opportunity that no other conservative U.S. President has had in my lifetime.

Now you might be thinking, well sure, but that doesn't mean that in the future, the Democrats will roll over and confirm any other nominees without a scorched earth fight. That would be true, but what if in the next election President Trump gets a 60 seat or better Senate? Now how does the selfishness of Ginsburg and Breyer look? Thoughts?

1 posted on 02/04/2017 9:49:51 AM PST by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Enterprise

By it’s very duty of protecting the constitution, the court SHOULD BE 100% conservative.

That’s the point of conservatism in the United States.


2 posted on 02/04/2017 9:51:16 AM PST by Celerity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise
Sadly, not true. Anthony Kennedy is not conservative on many issues.
3 posted on 02/04/2017 9:52:53 AM PST by Kazan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

Nice remarks....makes total sense.

Question.......there were several huge cases that were supposed to go before SCOTUS when Scalia died....

These cases probably would have been found to be favorable for Conservatives.

I think one case was a Right-to-Work and so on......

When Scalia died, they were left to stand without moving to SCOTUS.

Does anyone know if these cases can now move to SCOTUS?

Or, are they now not able to move to SCOTUS?


5 posted on 02/04/2017 9:57:53 AM PST by Be Careful
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

I want Ruthie and Breyer gone as quickly as possible, but I hardly think they are selfish for wanting to stay on, especially the last couple of years when it looked like Hitlery would take over.

Don’t forget the two morons obozo appointed.They are the two worst of the four and need to be replaced now, but it’ll never happen.

Trump should be calling for Roberts the Traitor to resign and should have refused to let him swear him in.


6 posted on 02/04/2017 9:58:08 AM PST by Founding Father (The Pedophile moHAMmudd (PBUH---Pigblood be upon him); Charles Martel for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

I have read several analysis indicating that the democrats will not go scorched earth on Neil Gorsuch because they have 10 senators up for re-election in 2018 in red states that voted Trump.

Their strategists are not unaware that the Republicans obstructed Garland for a year but gained 13 senate seats and that obstructing Gorsuch may not play out the same way for them because the majority do not like activist judges and disagree with legislating social issues from the bench.


10 posted on 02/04/2017 10:03:08 AM PST by Valpal1 (I am enjoying the lamentations of their girly-men on social media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise
Actually, this is what the anger chattering from the Leftist monkeys is all about.

They see it coming.

I think they will commit sedition and armed insurrection before they let it happen.

14 posted on 02/04/2017 10:16:31 AM PST by kiryandil (Will Hillary's BrownShirt Media thugs demand that The Deplorables all wear six-pointed Orange Stars?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

This means Thomas and Kennedy should resign as soon as the nuclear option is engaged and Trump is still President.


20 posted on 02/04/2017 10:30:03 AM PST by ChronicMA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

Don’t get too excited yet. A few (and it doesn’t take many in the Supreme Court) supposed “rock-ribbed conservatives” appointed by Republican presidents have jumped the shark to vote with the Libs. If Trump puts through two solid appointees (and they stay that way) during his term, America would owe him a great debt.


22 posted on 02/04/2017 10:32:39 AM PST by BradyLS (DO NOT FEED THE BEARS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

Isn’t the main requirement of being a liberal is take actions that give the appearance of being concerned for others, regardless of whether it works or not, just as long as it doesn’t significantly impact yourself?

Why would you expect godly behavior(sacrificing)from ungodly people?


23 posted on 02/04/2017 10:35:10 AM PST by alternatives? (Why have an army if there are no borders?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

Good post - I believe the real answer is that the left never expected to lose this election. I firmly believe had Trump not won the nomination (despite their confidence in opposing him and even hoping he did) we would have another President Clinton in the White House and a far different court.

I believe Justice Thomas may retire given past comments giving Trump another chance to find a younger candidate.

There is another bonus for the coming shift on the court - Justice Roberts may be pulled in the right direction - he seems to love consensus on the court and it is a powerful force so a more conservative court will most likely have influence on him.


25 posted on 02/04/2017 10:44:45 AM PST by volunbeer (Clinton Cash = Proof of Corruption)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise
When Obama was elected, it was assured that with a pretty much solid Senate vote, he was going to be able to appoint as many liberal Judges as vacancies arose. This was the point at which Ginsburg and Breyer should have taken one for the team, and retired. It would have enabled Obama to appoint four solid leftists who would have been on the court for a very lengthy time.

This is a VERY excellent point.

Upon further reflection, I wonder if that ship sailed early in the year of the 2014 midterm elections. Breyer and Buzzy should have bailed, and allowed the Democrat Senate to ram two new Justices through.

There was still hope if Zer0'Muslim had advanced two replacements in early 2015 - but they thought their #FakeStreamMedia had the 2016 election locked up.

I begin to appreciate the Miracle that is President Trump even more. 😀

30 posted on 02/04/2017 10:57:05 AM PST by kiryandil (Will Hillary's BrownShirt Media thugs demand that The Deplorables all wear six-pointed Orange Stars?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

The next one is going to get nasty. Let’s hope it’s soon. Ginsberg or Kennedy, I don’t care which.


35 posted on 02/04/2017 11:08:59 AM PST by keat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

Liberals begged Ginsburg to retire while the Liberal Messiah was President. She refused and now her desire to stay on the Court will lead to a solid Conservative majority on the Court. Thanks Ruth!


37 posted on 02/04/2017 11:16:17 AM PST by Repeal 16-17 (Let me know when the Shooting starts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

They aren’t as worried about court stacking as they are about their careers and place in history.

When has any SC judge in decent health retired in order to allow such a replacement?


43 posted on 02/04/2017 11:41:23 AM PST by SaxxonWoods (Ride To The Sound Of The Guns)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

If the Court loses a liberal like Ginsburg, I’d still love to see Trump nominate Merrick Garland as her replacement - with the threat. If Democrats oppose him, Trump withdraws the nomination and nominates a real conservative. Remember the Dems kept telling us what a moderate Garland is and how this was the best Republicans could hope for. But would he be the best Democrats could hope for from Trump?

I think the Dems would be so loaded for bear that a block of them would try to reject Garland in favor of somebody more extreme. Then Trump lowers the boom with the additional talking point that he TRIED to be fair with the Democrats but they would not go along so now he has no choice but to nominate the person he really wants.

This move puts the Democrats deeper on the edge as the Extremist Party while blunting forever the “Garland deserves a hearing, GOP stole the nomination, blah blah” talk.

Even if they accept Garland and approve him, you’ve got a more moderate judge than Ginsburg who has a chance to be drawn over as a swing vote on cases plus and Garland is already in his 60s where he’s unlikely to last more then 20 years on the High Court.


49 posted on 02/04/2017 12:15:27 PM PST by OrangeHoof (Get used to it - President Donald J. Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Enterprise

In the 2018 elections, the Dems are defending 25 Senate seats. The Republicans are defending 8.

Wonder how that will turn out?


64 posted on 02/04/2017 2:36:57 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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