Republicans Name the Presidential Candidate They Trust Most to Replace Justice Antonin Scalia

IJReview ^ | 2/14/15 | Justin Green

[Svartalfiar]

There are lots of articles about challenges. The only articles with definitive, authoritative answers are in his favor.

Exactly. The 2nd Amendment one is a pretty good read. While I do support the idea that Cruz is a NBC, I also think that the definition should be changed (legally) to a person born of two full-citizen parents.

[Toespi]

You have some serious anger about this and I am sorry I set you off. I am not a Cruz supporter at all, I have some concerns and am not making any decisions until I see where everyone stands close to my states primary. Interestingly, my nephew who has recently gone into the private sector and was a staffer for sixteen years for a conservative congressman, called Cruz exactly what you did, an opportunist. As we know he is very disliked in DC, and my neph said it is not all because of his political views but more about his dishonesty on issues and always looking for a reason to go rogue mostly to get camera time.

[Toespi]

Wow! That is really interesting, I had no idea. I just don’t see how a person who is not a lawyer could possibly do the job.

[Vermont Lt]

This is one of those polls written for the sake of taking up space.

It really doesn’t matter who the “people” want...Obama is the one who decides. The Senate says yes or no.

[Mears]

“You really are ignorant, aren’t you? Of course, a judge has to have a law degree - duh! since you have such a brick between your ears, I’ll just let it got at this. You are too ignorant to understand and I won’t waste my breath with any further discussion. You are stuck on stupid.”

---

You certainly enjoy tossing around insults at other posters.

Astonishing !

In this case you are the one stuck on stupid.

.

.

[Catsrus]

Your nephews report sounds like one I read from a Secret Service agent who said that Cruz is devious. this makes sense that he is always using an opportunity to further his career. GWB also said the same thing. And, I apologize if I went off on you without cause. We have to fight daily on this board against all the negativity about Trump from the Cruz supporters. Is Trump a flawed man? Yes, he is. Aren’t we all flawed though? The only perfect person who ever walked this earth was crucified on an old rugged cross on Mt. Calvary.

[MLL]

Trump? Really? The man has no legal experience whatsoever.

[Catsrus]

I get my fair share of insults hurled at me from the Cruzbots, so, don’t play all innocent. Educate yourself, and you won’t be stuck.

[EDINVA]

I don’t know either .. but there’s NO requirement that Justices be lawyers. As a practical matter, however, they always are.

We discussed this at dinner, and attorney spouse reminded us that at the time of the Revolution, and eventual drafting the Constitution, there weren’t law schools as we know them today and that well into the 20th century there were independent schools of law that later were purchased by and incorporated into universities.

In some states you can still become a lawyer without attending law school .. you can get into the bar by studying under a member of the bar, then taking a bar exam. There are some states where, if you graduate from law school, you don’t have to take the bar.

Huey Long never went to law school but memorized the Code and took the bar exam. Lots of interesting stories of successful lawyers not going to law school and/or taking the bar if you were to get into it.

[catnipman]

“competent judicial reviews”

ROTFLOL!

NONE of your links have ANYTHING to do with “competent judicial reviews”; they’re just a bunch of opinion pieces by various media outlets.

[huldah1776]

No worries if DT is nominated, especially if there are more justices who pass away before the inauguration but just in case, because he has a lot of experience with the law in regards to suing, commercial bankruptcy, divorce, eminent domain, “brand” litigation, business contracts, and whatever else.

[RasterMaster]

He currently has his own legal issues to answer for. He is unfit for the presidency and an attorney he hires to represent him in these cases should be the only influence he has in any court.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/12040702/Donald-Trump-sued-for-fraud-in-California-and-New-York.html

[Sicvee]

Actually, sutpid can be fixed.

[huldah1776]

I was wondering how long it had been since the university (bwahahahaha) closed. Thing is, most for-profit non-accredited schools do the same thing, especially to vets. Big target. This was one criteria for applying for admission in my book:

“Complaints from disenchanted students even include allegations that instead of having their picture taken - as promised - with Mr Trump himself, they had to settle for a photograph with a cardboard cut-out of the billionaire.”

hmmm. “especially to vets.” Need to find out if they were a target...?

[huldah1776]

“Trump answered the Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s suit with a complaint of his own. He accused the attorney general of trying to extort campaign contributions from him.”

http://www.usnewsuniversitydirectory.com/articles/trump-university-where-it-stands_15217.aspx#.VsFEaeaU_Yg

He does have inventive lawyers. I wonder how much info they have on trump and how many will be nominated for judicial positions. oh, lawyer-client confidentiality. Maranatha!

[Georgia Girl 2]

Yeh let Teddy pick another Roberts and nail the coffin shut.

[SaraJohnson]

Cruz was in Roberts’s camp. That has served us well. /s/

[justlittleoleme]

From 2012:
In the below article it says Seven years ago...

That is a tremendous amount of time for things to change... Roberts either has been corrupted or blackmailed.
Regardless. I think it is fair to say he hasn't lived up to what Cruz thought of him.

It is quite silly to blame Cruz for not being able to predict the future.

John Roberts is No Longer Appearing on Conservative Merit Badges

Seven years ago, during the confirmation hearings for John Roberts, Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz penned a gushing op-ed for National Review.

-snip-

Not anymore. When Roberts helped save "Obamacare," Cruz immediately blasted the Court for having "abdicated its responsibility to safeguard the Constitution." He didn't mention Roberts by name, but he insisted that the decision was more proof that Republicans needed to reject Cruz's opponent, Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst. "My opponent is, by nature and by over a decade of political office, a conciliator. Now is not a time for conciliation."

So here is the condensed timeline:

1995 - While clerking for Chief Justice William Rehnquist, I and my two fellow law clerks asked the chief whom he thought was the best Supreme Court lawyer currently practicing. The chief replied, with a twinkle in his eye, that he thought he could probably get a majority of his colleagues to agree that John Roberts was the best Supreme Court advocate in the nation.
2000 - Cruz recruits Roberts to assist Bush team in Florida Recount for about a week.
July 20, 2005 - Roberts Nominated For Supreme Court
July 20, 2005 - Ted Cruz writes article support roberts
August 4, 2005 - Drudge says new york times is investigating Roberts adoption papers

Apparently when the Democrats realized they could control a Supreme Court Justice’s vote through blackmail over his having committed a number of international crimes the Times pulled back and dropped its investigation. The Democrat paper of record pulled back because it didn’t want to ” break the seal of an adoption case” – as if violating laws ever means anything to Democrats in their quest for power. Keep in mind Barack Obama’s violation of his opponents “sealed” divorce records propelled him to a US Senate seat.

September 12, 2005 - Senate confirmation hearing began for Roberts. I have found no mention whatsoever of Roberts possible adoption problems, being brought up in the confirmation
September 30, 2005 - John Roberts Confirmed. All 55 Republicans, hallf of the Democrats and an independent voted Yes.

now skip forward 10 years later in the year 2015

June 20, 2015 - Chief Justice John Roberts broke with his three conservative colleagues on the Supreme Court and voted to uphold a key provision of the Affordable Care Act
June 29, 2015 - Texas Sen. Ted Cruz says ......Roberts “put on an Obama jersey” in writing the majority opinion in the last two landmark court cases on Obamacare.
June 30, 2015 - “Mr. Cruz was so enraged by the health-care ruling — as well as last week’s decision, not supported by Mr. Roberts, upholding gay marriage — that Mr. Cruz is calling for a constitutional amendment that would require Mr. Roberts and other Justices to stand for election every 8 years.

How well do you know anyone you have briefly worked with?
Looking at the above timeline, how was Cruz supposed to know when he wrote his article of support that Roberts had possibly secret illegal adoption of children from Ireland, and that the Democrats had leverage for blackmail?

[rockrr]

Thanks for offering up “the rest of the story”