Posted on 04/18/2017 1:00:21 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
I’m not sure who Allan Smith at Business Insider ran into who put a bug in his ear to talk to Trump confidant Chris Ruddy, but it must have been one heck of a conversation. The bottom line is pretty much the summation found in the title of this article. In order to avoid any more angst or consternation around Supreme Court nominations, Trump could short circuit the entire discussion by getting Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire now rather than trying to stick it out for four more years. And what would she get in return? A promise that the President would nominate the same guy Barack Obama tried to put on the court.
Chris Ruddy, a confidant of President Donald Trump, told Business Insider in a Monday interview that Trump should cut a deal with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. His proposition: Replace her on the bench with Judge Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s choice to fill Justice Antonin Scalia’s vacated seat in 2016.
Ruddy, who wrote about his opposition to the Senate invoking the so-called nuclear option to help get Judge Neil Gorsuch confirmed to the Supreme Court, said Trump nominating Garland to the court would be a “huge move.”
“I think they made a big mistake by pulling the nuclear option,” Ruddy said. “I wrote about it. I said they should not have done it. I think that he still should pick Merrick Garland and do a deal. Ruth Bader Ginsberg wants to retire, and I think they should swap her out, give her an offer where they would put Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court.”
This actually sounds like a brilliant plan except for the small detail of virtually everything involved in it being insane. First of all, Ruddy may be an old friend of the President’s and a trusted ally, but he’s not advising him on day to day White House operations. If he was he’d already be fighting Steve Bannon and Jared Kushner for desk space adjacent to the Oval Office. And if this is the sort of advice he’d be dispensing, I doubt he’d be in the building for long.
But let’s just say this was seriously under consideration. How much worse of a disaster could it be? The Senate GOP expended a vast amount of political capital and set off a firestorm by deciding to keep Garland’s name out of committee and waiting for the last election to wrap up. There were and still are plenty of conservatives who remain skeptical of President Trump and are not inclined to go along with many of his agenda items, but the one thing they can all agree on was that putting Neil Gorsuch on the bench was worth the pain of the trip. They also know that Trump has a list of other, similarly qualified and inclined judges in his pocket should he need to fill another vacancy and that keeps some from barking at him too loudly on other issues. Pushing Trump to do a deal like this would basically drain all the remaining conservative good will out of his pool.
That entire argument skips right past the question of why Trump would feel like he needs to make a deal. The filibuster is dead and gone. Provided he doesn’t go off of his list and nominate his wife or something, he can pretty much put anyone up he likes. Where is the incentive to make a deal with Ruth Bader Ginsburg? She can stay on the court for as long as she likes.
And what sort of incentive would Ginsburg have to make such a “deal” in the first place? First of all, would she feel 100% confident that Trump would hold up his end, particularly if it was done in private? He doesn’t get to nominate anyone until she’s at least announced her retirement, if not actually left the building. The President could still turn around and nominate anyone he wished. And if the deal was made in public Ginsburg would be further damaging the court by making public a dirty little secret which everyone knows but nobody wants to talk about. The Justices are supposed to be outside the political system. That’s why they have jobs for life. We all know that they would like to be able to pick a time to retire when the “correct” party holds the White House to nominate their successor, but they don’t generally say it. A “deal” such as this would tear the mask off entirely and show that it’s a rigged and highly politicized game.
I suppose the real exit question for all of you is whether or not anyone thinks that Trump is actually that crazy. That list of judges may have been one of the deciding factors which finally got him the support in the GOP he needed in a very, very tight election. I seriously doubt he’d get the GOP nomination for a second term if he put up Garland’s name. And could Garland even get confirmed? He didn’t make it out of committee last time so what makes us think he would now? The President could be slitting his own wrists politically and getting zero for it in return.
That’s right, get Trump to nominate someone for the Supreme Court who cannot possibly get confirmed, due to GOP opposition. That would be real smart. NOT.
I am not sure I would care to see it depend on the Senate.
I wish Trump would cut loose all these backstage groupies like Chris Ruddy...he’s a sleazy, backstabbing jerk and Trump has no need for him.
This is one of the more insane suggestions from LIB lunatics. She’ll die soon. Nominate the most strict conservative. Ram them in...no quarter to the Constitution - hating LIB lunatics. MAGA!!!
Why negotiate at all? why concede anything? they wouldn’t.
The liberals messed up by forcing the removal of the filibuster on Gorsuch. Thank you!!
Now we can put ANYONE on the bench with impunity, as long as he is in the list of 20 names already proposed by Trump and vetted as a conservative judges.
Give them nothing, and take away from them everything!
I’m not believing that Trump would make this kind of deal.
It would be an interesting question to ask Gingsberg who she would like to see replace her....
Dollars to donuts she says Michelle Obama...
SJB! Good to “see” you!
I don’t see anything brilliant about putting a damn liberal on the court!!!
The story doesn’t really make sense since the Senate is not going to be part of any bargain with Ginsburg.
That'd be a winner.
Garland is a certified Liberal.
Southern man don’t need him around, anyhow...
A bank robber shoots the guard at a bank, demands and gets a bag of money, and runs out of the bank.
The police are called and give chase. During the chase several officers are injured.
The getaway car crashes after killing several pedestrians in a crosswalk and the suspect is apprehended, cuffed, and put in the back of a patrol car.
On the way to jail the suspect offers the police a deal. He will give back half of the money if they repair his car for him, return his gun, and let him go.
A "deal" for Republicans to needlessly give up a seat on the Supreme Court makes just about as much sense.
Ruddy is a demonrat.
My thoughts exactly...
Mr. Ruddy trying to be relevant by telling Trump how to handle SCOTUS rather than describing what Trump has on his own mind.....
I agree about this is a non-serious discussion.
This is all Ginsburg has to live for so she won’t retire. She is like all liberals, sacrificing for the greater good is something other people should do.
Good to see you as well.
I don’t view replacing an old leftist with a younger leftist a very sound strategy
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.