Posted on 07/09/2018 4:43:05 PM PDT by LiveFreeOrDie2001
Thread for discussions before & after President Donald J Trump SCOTUS Pick!
Mark Levin just said he is 98 percent sure it is Kavanaugh and the folks at National Review and WSJ will be happy about that.
—
What’s Levin’s opinion? I seem to remember he thought any of the five names mentioned would be fine.
HA!
Did they say that when OBummer & Clintonian was Prez??
Seriously, I wonder how much impact that had on any potential nominee accepting the appointment.
I am very, very sorry to hear that Kethledge is in Michigan tonight.
So with Barrett and Kethledge at home, apparently it’s Kavanaugh or Hardiman.
Keeping an open mind, but these choices do not cheer me.
Yeah, it’s funny how the we won/you lost mentality turns into “can’t we all just work together” when the Republicans win.
Kavanaugh is more of a political operative judge than a orginialist in the mode of Gorsuch.
That’s not all bad. Gorsuch gave a very bad opinion in an immigration case earlier this year. Kavanaugh has a strong conservative viewpoint and will make the laws fit that viewpoint. He’s very solid on 2nd amendment, immigration. He would likely support Trump if he sues over a Mueller subpoena as he is on record saying President’s should not have to cooperate with an investigation during their Presidency.
NO NO NO! He’s an amnesty sympathizer
When I first heard Levin analyze all of them he said he was not that impressed with Kavanaugh but would support whoever Trump chooses.
Take the long view: Barrett will get more valuable judicial experience before the next vacancy. She’ll get to replace another woman and have a heavy GOP majority in the Senate to overcome defections like Murkowski and Collins.
It was just not her time. Not yet.
Yes, it sounds like she can just consider herself in training for that. I think she will make it.
Thanks for your input. It is encouraging.
In follow-on litigation to the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on the Second Amendment in D.C. v. Heller, a D.C. Circuit panel majority, consisting of two Republican appointees, upheld the District of Columbia’s ban on possession of most semi-automatic rifles and its registration requirement for all guns in D.C. Judge Kavanaugh dissented (in Heller v. D.C. (2011)). An excerpt from his dissent:
In Heller, the Supreme Court held that handguns – the vast majority of which today are semi-automatic – are constitutionally protected because they have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens. There is no meaningful or persuasive constitutional distinction between semi-automatic handguns and semiautomatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles, like semi-automatic handguns, have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens for self-defense in the home, hunting, and other lawful uses. Moreover, semiautomatic handguns are used in connection with violent crimes far more than semi-automatic rifles are. It follows from Heller’s protection of semi-automatic handguns that semi-automatic rifles are also constitutionally protected and that D.C.’s ban on them is unconstitutional. (By contrast, fully automatic weapons, also known as machine guns, have traditionally been banned and may continue to be banned after Heller.)
Fear and intimidation is how the left operates. Wouldn’t surprise me if that was an issue.
Yes and it’s back on thank God. The one night all year the satellite went out it had to be tonight. Justhopes it stays on until after the announcement, but I’m still hearing thunder
I hope so!
FWIW - I trust Laura Ingraham on court picks. I’m not thrilled with Laura all the time, but she’s good on immigration and also the courts.
Laura Ingraham: Brett Kavanaugh
Fox News host Laura Ingraham joined the chorus of figures on the right banding behind a potential Kavanaugh nomination, tweeting Friday night that the judge’s “12 yrs of STELLAR opinions” should overshadow any criticism he may receive for originally being named to the bench under the George W. Bush administration.
“The fact that Kavanaugh—like so many conservatives his age—worked for Bush 43 is a nonsensical reason to oppose him for SCOTUS,” she tweeted
He was not my top choice but he probably is the "safest" pick in that he has a long judicial history and lots of friends from the RINO's to the NeverTrumper's to conservatives. From his long judicial history, I don't see way he would turn into a Souter or even a Kennedy, at worst he would probably end up like John Roberts, votes conservative about 90% of the time but on rare occasions jump ship.
Again he probably wasn't the "best" choice (meaning the most conservative, but he will probably be the easiest to confirm...
Don’t know why Trump would pick someone with ties to the the Bushes.
Bump
What channels do you watch?
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.