Posted on 01/24/2017 12:18:54 PM PST by SeekAndFind
President Donald Trump has narrowed his first Supreme Court nomination to three finalists, with 10th Circuit judge Neil Gorsuch and 3rd Circuit judge Thomas Hardiman emerging as front-runners while 11th Circuit Judge Bill Pryor remains in the running but fading, according to people familiar with the search process.
Trump interviewed at least those three finalists in New York during the transition, according to a person familiar with the search. Trump himself said Tuesday he would make a selection for the court’s empty seat next week and summoned top Senate leaders to the White House to discuss his impending choice to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, who died nearly a year ago.
“The president want to move as quickly as he can,” said Leonard Leo, one of Trump’s advisers on the court pick and a top official at the Federalist Society.
Leo declined to discuss Trump’s short list, but he praised both Gorsuch and Hardiman effusively.
“Under our Constitution, the power rests with the people, and that was at the core of Justice Scalia’s legacy, and you heard from President Trump’s inauguration that is the core of Trump’s agenda, and that’s very much the core of what Neil Gorsuch’s record is as a jurist,” Leo said. “He’s an excellent writer. He’s got sharp analytical ability, strong intellect and he’s got a lot of strength and courage. Those are things that the president very much wants in a nominee.”
“Hardiman,” Leo added, “shares many of the same qualities.”
Leo went on to say that Hardiman is “an extraordinarily talented and smart jurist” who has “a very direct and understandable writing style.”
As Gorsuch’s fortunes have risen, Pryor’s have dimmed.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
He is currently the subject of raging debate on an off-the-record group email list that includes many in the conservative legal and political communities, including many Republican Senate staffers, thanks to his decision to join the majority in Glenn v. Brumby, a 2011 opinion that protected transgender people from workplace discrimination.
I would like to see Trump nominate someone from the state courts. The Fed bench is becoming too incestuous. Judges from the states would take a friendlier view towards states rights.
> I would like to see Trump nominate someone from the state courts.
and I would like to see him nominate someone from the NRA.
He will need at least two - Scalia and Ruth Buzzy.
This is going to be a 60 vote nomination. I would be interested in hearing some opinion on what Dems just might be willing to break the certain filibuster. My current guess is that there are none. But I could be wrong. It happened once last year.
HARDIMAN. HARDIMAN. HARDIMAN. Let’s go Hardiman!
Also, Kennedy and Breyer are getting up there in years too.
Trump could easily have three Supreme Court vacancies to fill in these next four years.
Not to mention, there are frequently vacancies in the lower federal courts. The pres. fills those positions also.
Is Ruth-less gonna go room temperature soon??
As left looney as she is. She was Nino Scalia’s personal friend on the bench.
God I pray he picks the right constitution fearing conservative person or else we’ll get stuck with turncoat!! ALA Roberts!!
Dont knock it. That law helped me keep my last job :)
Plus I’m on the short list for SC Justice.
Not sure what I’ll identify as yet :)
That is a good idea, Mr. Buckeye
Although he is more of a TV judge. Judge Napolitano oozes ‘constitution’ on everything he says. If ‘the apprentice ‘ Trump can be president, I suppose Napolitano can be a SCOTUS justice.
I don’t think they would get a filibuster against one of the two favorites. They are replacing Scalia, after all, and the Dems facing re-election in the red states will not die on that hill. However, if one of the left wing SC justices retire/die, that is where the big fight will occur.
Notice any difference between President Trump and the former?
“Trump is set to meet Tuesday afternoon with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on Judiciary, to discuss his coming Supreme Court choice.”
He doesn’t do his deeds in the dark. Whatever the outcome, I’m so proud of President Trump for trying to do right by Dems. If they spit in his face, well ...
Napolitano has met with DJT a few times — most recently just last week, I think. He gave a detailed interview to Shep that same afternoon. I wouldn’t mind seeing him considered for SCOTUS.
Hope you are right. And you certainly are for the case of a Lib-Supreme replacement.
I think he’ll draw some Dem votes. The math is against the Dem Senators in two years and several are in states the Trumpmeister took.
“This is going to be a 60 vote nomination. I would be interested in hearing some opinion on what Dems just might be willing to break the certain filibuster. My current guess is that there are none. But I could be wrong. It happened once last year.”
You’re certainly right that it won’t be easy, but I think that his first choice gets confirmed (esp. since the Dems don’t really lose anything by replacing Scalia with a similar judge). After that, it depends more on who’s being replaced, and how successful/popular Trump is at that moment. If we’re in an economic boom, then the Dems will be pretty hard-pressed to stand in his way.
The Dims are ready to Bork anyone Trump nominates.
politico is FAKE NEWS!
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.