Posted on 04/30/2017 7:19:34 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
President Trump will stick with the same list of potential nominees for the next Supreme Court vacancy, he told The Washington Times in an exclusive interview in which he also waved aside the lack of a honeymoon from Capitol Hill, saying Republicans are “going to get there” and Democrats are still smarting over losing an election they thought they couldn’t lose.
..
He also said he expects the near-universal opposition to his agenda from congressional Democrats to wane.
“I notice it calming down,” he said.
Reflecting on his first weeks, the businessman turned statesman took pride in having upended traditional procedures in Washington. He said he has already notched foreign policy successes that eluded Mr. Obama — such as the release of Egyptian-American charity worker Aya Hijazi from detention in Egypt — and has made his mark at home with the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch.
“You’ll have hundreds of cases decided by 5-4, and you got that. So that’s a great legacy,” the president said, noting that at 49, Justice Gorsuch has decades of important decisions ahead of him.
Mr. Trump shook the election campaign last year when he announced a list of 21 potential Supreme Court nominees, selected with the help of the Federalist Society and The Heritage Foundation. The list was an instant hit with conservatives and helped cement the candidate’s support among the Republican base.
“It’s a great list. From the moment I put that list out, it solved that problem. And I was proud to say it was my idea,” he said.
{..snip..}
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Asked specifically whether he would pick from the list of candidates he put forward in the campaign, Mr. Trump was unequivocal: “Yes,”
“You’ll have hundreds of cases decided by 5-4, and you got that. So that’s a great legacy,”....
YES IT IS!!!!
And he has the guts to say what everyone knows.
It’s a political machine at this point, the SCOTUS.
A VERY powerful one.
Can’t wait to replace one more liberal.
Cause I dont trust Robert.
Who’s the fifth vote? There’s Roberts, Alito, Thomas, the new gentlemen and who else? thanks
Kennedy
Who appointed him? Thanks
Who appointed him? He’s solidly conservative? Thanks.
Your innocence gets old after some time.
Go ahead and post the court. You have the time. Be a member or be a scab.
Please keep Globalist Ivanka away from the process. She should go work for the ‘new’ FOX NEWS. She would fit right in.
Innocence?
You got the wrong guy. :)
You didn’t have to answer me.
I do a lot of searches on google for folks on the board.
I don’t even recognize your name but I DO KNOW that you’re a miserable human being.
That must suck :)
Most here aren’t.
I donate 50 a month but I dont think your name is on the 300 list. Be proud that you are a MEMBER and not a SCAB and tell Jim that you are not currently on the list.
Either that or you should probably STFU next time you think of posting to me :)
Ciao Bella!!!
Good, now we can dispense with the Ted Cruz for Supreme Court talk......
4 Anthony Kennedy official SCOTUS portrait.jpg Anthony Kennedy
(born 1936) CA Associate
Justice Powell February 3, 1988
(97-0) February 18, 1988
–
Incumbent 29 years, 71 days
105 DavidSouter.jpg David Souter
(born 1939) NH Associate
Justice Brennan October 2, 1990
(90-9) October 9, 1990
–
June 29, 2009
(Retired) 18 years, 263 days George H. W. Bush
106 Clarence Thomas official SCOTUS portrait.jpg Clarence Thomas
(born 1948) GA Associate
Justice T. Marshall October 15, 1991
(52-48) October 23, 1991
–
Incumbent 25 years, 189 days
107 Ruth Bader Ginsburg 2016 portrait.jpg Ruth Bader Ginsburg
(born 1933) NY Associate
Justice B. White August 3, 1993
(96-3) August 10, 1993
–
Incumbent 23 years, 263 days Bill Clinton
108 Stephen Breyer, SCOTUS photo portrait.jpg Stephen Breyer
(born 1938) MA Associate
Justice Blackmun July 29, 1994
(87-9) August 3, 1994
–
Incumbent 22 years, 270 days
109 Official roberts CJ.jpg John Roberts
(born 1955) MD Chief
Justice Rehnquist September 29, 2005
(78–22) September 29, 2005
–
Incumbent 11 years, 213 days George W. Bush
110 010 alito.jpg Samuel Alito
(born 1950) NJ Associate
Justice O’Connor January 31, 2006
(58-42) January 31, 2006
–
Incumbent 11 years, 89 days
111 Sonia Sotomayor in SCOTUS robe.jpg Sonia Sotomayor
(born 1954) NY Associate
Justice Souter August 6, 2009
(68-31) August 8, 2009
–
Incumbent 7 years, 265 days Barack Obama
112 Elena Kagan Official SCOTUS Portrait (2013).jpg Elena Kagan
(born 1960) MA Associate
Justice Stevens August 5, 2010
(63-37) August 7, 2010
–
Incumbent 6 years, 266 days
113 Judge Gorsuch official portrait.jpg Neil Gorsuch
(born 1967) CO Associate
Justice Scalia April 7, 2017
(54-45) April 10, 2017
–
Incumbent 20 days
Maybe a real Protestant Christian could be nominated and approved. Five Catholics, three Jews, and one Episcopalian. It seems a bit unbalanced.
You are an easy disposition. I am more old school than you and have the experience to back it up.
Why you attack is your gift.
Good news!
Preach it!
I think the best guard against a backslider (obviously there are no guarantees) would be an active member of a solid, evangelical, Bible-believing church.
Good, hope he draws from that list. Guess what, before some idiot proposes Canadian-born Lyn’ Ted, note he is NOT on that list. So don’t bother!
Justice Roberts is fine if he isn’t blackmailed and forced to vote for the psychopathic sodomites/socialists. They have a way with bribing judges or killing them, though, so they have to be very careful.
Any “law” that is antithetical to the Constitution is “null and void” anyhow.....We need to hold to that and impeach any “judge” who dares make up “law” or suggest it. There should have been no Row v Wade or irrational homosexual “marriage”-—what a removal of Right Reason and Natural Law from our Constitution (which you CAN”T DO.....) Where is Mark Levin on this??? and Rush Limbaugh??? All unjust law is “null and void” and it is impeachable for any judge to promote irrational evil cr@p like sodomite “marriage”. There was NEVER any “Natural Right” to kill human babies or to sodomize each other.
Wow. That was powerful.
Somebody got pissed that I asked you this question instead of looking it up myself.
Your answer is the reason.
...what a removal of Right Reason and Natural Law from our Constitution (which you CAN”T DO.....) ..
Didn’t know about that and it’s not something one will just stumble across.
Your reply is probably the best argument I’ve read for what the SCOTUS should be.
They had a virtual monopoly on SCOTUS for well over a century. Sorry it upsets you that other religions now get to be on the court for a few decades.
Maybe a rock solid proven conservative could be nominated instead of some sketchy judge who is said to be good because his "philosophy" is supposedly "originalist". Nominating a proven conservative worked well with Alito, strange that we haven't tried it otherwise.
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.