Posted on 07/22/2021 5:51:20 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
In the waning days of Donald Trump's presidency, Amy Coney Barrett won confirmation to the Supreme Court and Clarence Thomas received an equally consequential promotion -- to Chief Justice of the United States.
Not officially, of course. John G. Roberts, Jr., retains the title and the middle seat on the Supreme Court bench. But the Chief Justice has just one essential power that differentiates his role from that of the other Justices. The Chief has the right to assign the court's opinions when he is in the majority. When the Chief Justice is in the minority, though, the assignment power goes to the senior Associate Justice who is in the majority.
Thomas, who was confirmed in 1991, is now the longest tenured Justice on the court. More notably, he is now the leading figure among the five solid conservatives on the court -- Thomas himself, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Barrett.
In crucial, contested cases, Chief Justice Roberts has increasingly been voting with the three remaining liberals -- Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. If Roberts continues this pattern, that means Thomas will be the senior Justice in several significant 5 to 4 cases and thus enjoy the right to assign majority opinions, including, of course, to himself.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
CNN just resents the idea
....articulate and intelligent...
I am hoping the rumors I hear are real.....good ol John boy is no longer on the bench....
Neither of them would have ended up anywhere near my "short list", nor would have Amy Coney Barrett (she had too much of a flakey oddball background and would be as easy target for the RATS)
I recently looked back at the threads at the time Trump nominated his trio, and my memory didn't fail me. About 95% of FReepers were THRILLED with the Gorsuch and Barrett appointments, and about 80% were thrilled with Kav (which changed to 95% of FReepers supporting him once the left went nuclear on him and declared him to be a woman-hating psychotic sexual predator)
Plenty of FReepers DID argue all three of them would be Scalia clones, in spite of having zero evidence pointing to that (certainly in the case of Trump's first two picks). Their no. #1 goofball argument was since the judge (or, at least the Federalist Society and the White House) CLAIMED the judge's "judicial philosophy" was "originalist", it somehow magically guranteed they'd always vote the way we want. I compared the magical "originalist" stuff to Popeye after he snarfs down a can of spinach. Wonderful stuff, that "originalism" will apparently turn ANY mediocre establishment hack judge into Scalia 2.0.
Stupid and weak GWB should have named Scalia Chief Justice. Instead, I suspect the dumbass thought—or was told—because a Chief was gone, he had to be replaced with a new chief.
If you elevate a AJ, you have to win two Senate confirmations rather than just one. I think that’s why they don’t usually do it. But yeah, CJ Thomas would be awesome!
I had no idea. Thank you. That wouldn't have happened, because, again duh-bya was/is weak and stupid.
Most of these Justices are opinionated. Hell, it’s their job.
>> SCOTUS is non-partisan
>> Kavanaugh and Gorsuch are to the left of Roberts
How do you reconcile those two factors?
Effectively, SCOTUS is highly partisan — arguably justification for the odd number of 9.
Regardless, agree with your breakdown of the justices.
I wish.
I don’t blame him. He missed out on many very events, even when Trump was president. He has not been treated well by the Republican administration. If I were Thomas I’d wait for a big vote and then use it as leverage. If the Republicans don’t support him he could cast an unexpected vote.
The Article was written by Jeffrey Toobin...
They should name a Blue Origin Rocket after him.
I think the main reason Scalia or Thomas wasn’t elevated is because this would have created a separate and contentious vote. It was far easier just to appoint Bob Roberts as Chief.
Good point, it forces the President to try and get two nominees thru the Senate at once, when he only needed one. Oddly enough, I believe Scalia was confirmed 96-0 in 1986, which would never happen in today’s hyper partisan climate.
There are 5 solid conservatives on the court?
Am I reading this right? Thomas should threaten to vote the wrong way on something in order to force "Republicans" to do......what? I don't understand at all.
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.