Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Opinion: Clarence Thomas Is the new Chief Justice
CNN ^ | July 22, 2021 | Jeffrey Toobin

Posted on 07/22/2021 5:51:20 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: cockroach_magoo

CNN just resents the idea

....articulate and intelligent...


21 posted on 07/22/2021 7:50:02 PM PDT by drSteve78 (Je suis deplorable. WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE IT ANYMORE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sauropod

I am hoping the rumors I hear are real.....good ol John boy is no longer on the bench....


22 posted on 07/22/2021 7:50:44 PM PDT by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway; Impy
I was also extremely skeptical about both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. I was HELL NO on Gorsuch (correctly predicting he'd be a Sandra Day O'Connor type justice and move Scalia's seat considerably to the left) and I was "hold your nose and vote Kavanaugh because there's a SLIM chance he MIGHT be SLIGHTLY better than Anthony Kennedy".

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.

23 posted on 07/22/2021 7:53:54 PM PDT by BillyBoy ("States rights" is NOT a suicide pact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: cockroach_magoo

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.


24 posted on 07/22/2021 7:58:57 PM PDT by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Captainpaintball

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!


25 posted on 07/22/2021 8:16:58 PM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Still Thinking
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.

I had no idea. Thank you. That wouldn't have happened, because, again duh-bya was/is weak and stupid.

26 posted on 07/22/2021 8:30:10 PM PDT by Captainpaintball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

Most of these Justices are opinionated. Hell, it’s their job.


27 posted on 07/22/2021 8:37:06 PM PDT by Lisbon1940 (No full-term Governors (at the time of election))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

>> 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.


28 posted on 07/22/2021 8:38:16 PM PDT by Gene Eric (Don't be a statist!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cherry

I wish.


29 posted on 07/22/2021 11:05:15 PM PDT by sauropod (The smartphone is the retina of the mind's eye.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: lee martell

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.


30 posted on 07/23/2021 7:57:09 AM PDT by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

The Article was written by Jeffrey Toobin...

They should name a Blue Origin Rocket after him.


31 posted on 07/23/2021 8:00:04 AM PDT by Kickass Conservative (Trump - Make America Great Again / Biden - Make American Grovel Again...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy; AuH2ORepublican; nickcarraway

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.


32 posted on 07/23/2021 9:08:01 AM PDT by Impy ("We didn't steal the election, we swear!!!" - Sincerely, The Election Thieves )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Impy

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.


33 posted on 07/23/2021 11:41:46 AM PDT by BillyBoy ("States rights" is NOT a suicide pact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

There are 5 solid conservatives on the court?


34 posted on 07/23/2021 11:52:24 AM PDT by Leep (Save America. Lock down Joe Biden!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane
. 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.

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.

35 posted on 07/23/2021 12:48:34 PM PDT by Impy ("We didn't steal the election, we swear!!!" - Sincerely, The Election Thieves )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson