[AnotherUnixGeek]

Good choice? Bad Choice?

I have no idea. The thing is, though, I have no reason to believe that the Federalist Society has any clue either. They seem to have some abstract, idealized notion of an SC justice who treats the Constitution like it was handed down by God and not one word must ever be changed or disregarded. Such justices do not exist in the real world - the closest we get is a few lonely conservatives who fight a losing battle to preserve existing precedent while liberal justices legislate from the bench with the aid of Federalist Society-approved cowards like John Roberts.

I'd be far more comfortable with Ted Cruz as the nominee than any sitting judge - a right-wing politician like Cruz has never hidden how he'd rule on any issue.

[rollo tomasi]

Cruz would be the one pick that could possibly be confirmed by the end of October.

I don’t think a lot of people realize how time consuming the vetting process is to nominate a judge. You can’t just nominate and start the voting process, each Senator can call a meeting with the nominee for instance. FBI checks can lead to “delays”, Judicial committee hearings can be “delayed” by “procedures”.

Since Cruz is a Senator, he could bypass a lot of those delays but I think the powers that be want a female. Who knows. Virtue signaling and identity politics should give way to concrete results IMO.

[rollo tomasi]

BTW, a active lower court Judge nominated to the USSC still must go through the vetting process again. The only exemption is a retired or sitting Senator.

[old-ager]

> I’d be far more comfortable with Ted Cruz as the nominee than any sitting judge -

Great point, and I’ll abstract it. No politicians for president. No career judges for SC.

[jpsb]

Anyone that thinks the son of a Cuban born in Canada is a natural born citizen of the United States does not belong on the SC.