Posted on 07/02/2018 7:21:06 AM PDT by GonzoII
As the list of possible SCOTUS picks narrows to rumored likelies, what about the women?
Who will Trump pick to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy? We have some clues: “It will be somebody from that list,” the president said Wednesday, referring to the 25 names he published in November. Reports since then have narrowed down these top contenders to five insider favorites. “We have to pick one that’s going to be there for 40 years, 45 years,” Trump also said, suggesting a judge’s relative youth may be a deciding factor. There are six women on the list, and one in pretty much everyone’s top five. Interestingly, none of these six went to the Ivies, already a point of difference from the current nine. Plus, women tend to live longer than men, maximizing the longevity factor for a lifetime appointee. And the appointment of a female justice would (a) Be helpful to a White House with preexisting women problems, while (b) making Democrat's full-scale resistance to the pick harder and potentially more costly.
Here's a look at the women who might make the Court:
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
We have enough women on the court.
This administration has “preexisting women problems”, eh?
That’s a new one to me.
I read some think Trump is trying to forestall McCaskill(?) and the Alaska woman senator backing out, due to Roe vs. Wade etc.
Not a single senator can back out, now that we lost the vote of McCain due to his illness
You bet, that’s all we need, another Sandra Day O’Connor.
Three words: Sandra Day O’Connor
Plus, anyone even remotely endorsed by the Weekly Standard is highly suspect.
Save the wimmen pick for when Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg goes toes up. Even if that was only three weeks after Kennedy’s replacement gets sworn in, the media would be beating the drum for a gal.
If nothing else, Trump thinks strategically. These interviews can be both for now and down the road.
Everyone on the list is endorsed by both the Federalist Society and Heritage Foundation.
The problem is Trump has to have all the GOP Senators on board. We have too many squishy GOPers. I can see Flake (AZ) pulling a McCain and voting against just to give the finger to Trump since he is not running for re-election
“We have enough women on the court.”
Breyer and Roberts are all I see. The 3 hags don’t count as anything.
Isn’t there some kind of law that states Senators must report to work every so many months? What if a senator was in a coma for years? Or was crippled and could not get to DC, even if he had all of his marbles? Speaking of which, I cannot believe that McCain still has all of his. Ugh, he is truly a traitor.
I say Kavanaugh. Then go for the young looker next time around. Unless we can be sure that one of the young women will not ‘evolve’.
The females on the court are all liberal. Would you really not want a conservative woman on the court?
Do you have a problem with women? What is “enough”?
I want someone who can read and understand the Constitution.
Few seem capable of that. Of either sex.
“shall not be infringed” and “natural born citizen” do not need to be defined, they mean what they say.
There are a lot of good conservative women to choose from. Trust me, you don’t go from clerking for Scalia to becoming a liberal on the Court.
The three we have are enough.
“Not a single senator can back out, now that we lost the vote of McCain due to his illness”
Filthy democrats won’t rest until they have the woman balling her eyes out during confirmation. That’s why I could never be confirmed because I would be knocking over desks and people trying to get at the throats of the democrats.
Sheesh, we don't even have one.
Exactly. When Ginsburg’s seat is open, there will be a clamor for another woman to replace her.
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.