Posted on 07/07/2018 10:12:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
President Trump is slated to announce his highly anticipated pick to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court on Monday night after narrowing down a list of potential nominees to just three likely names.
As the president prepares to make his selection, which comes less than four months before the midterm elections, conservative activists are publicly urging him to consider a number of picks that look likely to push the balance of the court toward conservatives for decades.
Trump has reportedly narrowed his list of seven interviewed candidates to just three federals appeals court judges: Brett Kavanaugh, Raymond Kethledge and Amy Coney Barrett. He is set to unveil his pick at the White House in prime time on Monday night.
Democrats and some Republicans are pressuring Trump to pick a nominee who in their view is not intent on overturning Roe v. Wade, the landmark case that legalized abortion across the country in 1973. Trump has said recently that he will not ask candidates about their stance on the case as he prepares to make his decision....
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
“Who top conservatives”
How does one go about becoming that?
There is no such thing as a “top conservative”. Only the eGOP thinks they are the rulers of Americans.
“Boy howdy!”
LOL! We went to a church where some of the men in the rowdy “Amen Corner” shouted that instead of “Amen!”. Too funny.
Roe V Wade is flawed——b/c it was decided on right to privacy. It can justly be overturned on the issue of “personhood”.
Medical technology has advanced in terms of the biological indications of “who is a person.”
None of which present when Roe V Wade was decided.
Planned (gag) Parenthood themselves prove personhood....when they sell baby body parts.
I don’t understand the love for Mike Lee.
Okeydoker has it right. Stare Decisis is essential at all levels of the Court system. And, the doctrine embodies the conditions needed to overrule an established precedent.
“Settled law” is lefty shorthand for leave Roe v. Wade alone.
There is a dangerous gambit that might be in play. Since there are a handful of worthless and dangerous Republican senators offering to torpedo the nomination unless their fruity demands are met, there is another consideration.
What are the very best election projections for the senate?
That is, if there is a projection that the Republicans will pick up a bunch of senate seats, then President Trump may decide to submit a “sacrificial goat” nominee, guaranteed to lose, so that the *next* senate will vote for the one he really wants. What would this accomplish?
It would enrage the Republican rank and file, who would be even more inclined to turn out for the mid-terms, maybe increasing Republicans in the house and maximizing the senate. Plus it would insure that the next nominee would be more like Gorsuch.
However, if the senate election projections are indeterminate:
It would be a deal with some of the Democrats in red states that they would vote down the current nominee then for the next justice, as a few did for Gorsuch. This would shore up their voting base to improve their election odds, which would still overcome the worthless Republicans.
Of course it sounds far fetched, but Washington is all about ruthless horse trading like this.
All the candidates are very qualified. Trump is going to pick the one that will force the lefties look as crazy as possible.
Ann sadly is a liar. In going for Kavanaugh she has gone all out against Kethledge.
Ann Coulter's last tweet on Kethledge references Van Don Nguyen v. Holder, 571 F.3d 524
In the first place the opinion was written not by Kethledge but by Merritt. All three judges on the panel voted to reverse and did so because of a recent Supreme Court decision noting that the law requiring deportation was for "crimes of violence" and the SC has held on multiple times that this phrase is ambiguous and not well defined in law.
These three judges UPHELD THE LAW. Don't like the law, get Congress to pass a new one. And they did so applying the 2008 Decision of the SC which SCALIA WROTE. The judges here explained:
Justice Scalia recently explained in Santos that the rule of lenity prevents courts from having to "read the mind" of Congress and is a "venerable" requirement that the federal courts have applied for two centuries when interpreting ambiguous criminal statutes. When a criminal statute is ambiguous as to its intent, the "tie" goes to the defendant. Because we cannot find that auto theft is "unambiguously" a crime of violence under Section 16(b), we should follow the ancient rule and overrule the administrative agency in this case..
STRIKE ONE against crazie Annie.
COULTER LIED
The Hill doesn’t know any real conservatives.
If we didn’t have stare decsisis judges really would be all-powerful and you would have no idea of what the law is.
Stare Decisis and settled law means the Dred Scott ruling is still in effect.
Idiots.
WATCH OUT for “conservatives” these days.
Things are not always what they seem..................
“None of which present when Roe V Wade was decided”.
Except for the fact that conception creates a human being with all the human chromosomes,, well-known even during my grade-school “birds and bees” classes.
The Right to Life is not even remotely dependent on “personhood”. Who defines that term?
We see how well “personhood” worked out in 1930s and 1940s Germany.
Yes, the left uses stare decisis to fool the public into thinking that means a case can never be overturned. That BS is completely wrong. Cases found to have been decided wrong are in fact overturned all the time.
Dont accept the lefts definition of stare decisis because they only mean it to protect their left wing opinions. Like everything else the Left perverts the meaning in order to manipulate the public.
I don’t think trump would go with a “sacrificial lamb” but if you’re implying that R’s are going to gain senate seats then i think you’re absolutely right ... and likely to replace a couple of RINO’s with conservatives too ... This group don’t match who i think are conservative leaders but i do respect opinions from Jim DeMint and Laura Ingram. I’m rather underwhelmed by this entire group of 7 or so finalists. much rather see a few heritage foundation originals in the group. I have some issues with all 7 of them but think Lee or Kavanaugh is worth supporting. Otherwise I’d rather hit the reject button and wait to try to get someone more “scalia-like”
I think President Trump is 5/6ths of the way through a challenging battle strategy where he and others are trying and succeeding to keep a precise order to victory.
However, his enemies are looking for any opportunity to counterattack with almost desperation, thrashing about.
The SCOTUS nominee is an important part, but so are the elections. Senator Cruz is looking to the *next* nominee by setting the groundwork Mike Lee, hopefully with a more Republican senate.
Breyer and Ginsburg maybe next, but tragically, justice Thomas’ name is also suggested. Yet must be considered in the strategy.
The SCOTUS nominee is an important part, but so are the elections. Senator Cruz is looking to the *next* nominee by setting the groundwork Mike Lee, hopefully with a more Republican senate.
Interesting thought, maybe true. Waiting for ginsburg then go for the jugular. I like the way you think, i think.
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.