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

To: jjotto
No one will ever nominate someone almost 70 to any court, much less the USSC.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Good point. Yet ... he was nominated in 2016. Is there a magic number between 64 and 70?

I still think Garland is trashing his legacy as a judge by becoming a fully-compromised political hack. And I think he is aware of this. The man doesn't look too happy.

1,166 posted on 08/11/2022 3:46:57 PM PDT by Disestablishmentarian (The next war has already started. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1164 | View Replies ]


To: Disestablishmentarian

The reason Garland was nominated in 2016 was because of his age. Dems hoped his short term on the court would be seen as a compromise enticing GOP senators to support a Dem candidate they would have otherwise rejected. It didn’t work.

Note that Sen. Grassley of Judiciary rejected Garland on USSC before McConnell weighed in. Senate Majority Leader doesn’t match the power of Speaker in the House.


1,170 posted on 08/11/2022 4:02:48 PM PDT by jjotto ( Blessed are You LORD, who crushes enemies and subdues the wicked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1166 | View Replies ]

To: Disestablishmentarian

1,185 posted on 08/11/2022 4:24:15 PM PDT by Melian ( Unity is all. )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1166 | 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