Jump to content

Trump's Supreme Court Pick


lawman

Recommended Posts

I say stack the courts with originalists and see what happens.

 

Shouldn't be political at all. They are there to interpret the law, not make it.

 

Amen! + 1000%

 

It shouldn't be political. The democrats have made it that way. It should be simply "does this law conflict with the Constitution"! And it sounds like Judge Gorsuch will be the right person for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Precedent? No. But there's no question Garland should have been given a vote.

"No question?" I disagree. Uncle Joe had a "question."https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1SUn0zTGUQ

 

Yes There's no question Garland have gotten a hearing, at the very least.

 

Biden was talking about not announcing a nominee in July, which is after the Courts term for the year. Obama nominated Garland with nearly a year to go in his term.

Regardless, Garland deserved a vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every Illinois/Republican gun bill that was drug thru the crack of Madigan's rear deserved a vote. Every Republican bill Harry Reid wadded up and dropped into the circular file deserved a vote. Political agendas poisoned and killed principals a long time ago. You can have targeted outrage for what good it does, but it would be foolish for one side to "play fair" because the other side cries foul, all the while they are stabbing them in the back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Precedent? No. But there's no question Garland should have been given a vote.

"No question?" I disagree. Uncle Joe had a "question."

 

Yes There's no question Garland have gotten a hearing, at the very least.

 

Biden was talking about not announcing a nominee in July, which is after the Courts term for the year. Obama nominated Garland with nearly a year to go in his term.

Regardless, Garland deserved a vote.

 

Uncle Joe said there shouldn't be an election year Supreme Court nomination. If so, Uncle Joe said the Senate Judiciary should "seriously consider" NOT scheduling confirmation hearings. That's exactly what just happened. The Senate refused to schedule confirmation hearings after Obama nominated Garland with less than a year left in Obama's term. There's "no question" about it? At the very least, Biden questioned it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just Durbin being Durbin.

I got the same form letter back.

My response to him:

 

Sen. Durbin,

 

All recent SCOTUS nominees have followed the lead set by Justice Ginsburg of not answering hypothetical questions. Judge Gorsuch answered exactly as Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor did and you voted for them.

I

The vote for Justice Sotomayor was 68-31 which included 9 Republican votes and Justice Kagan won approval by a vote of 63-37 with 5 Republican votes. I can only hope Judge Gorsuch, who many say is more qualified than the two previous nominees, is extended the same courtesy by the Democrats.

 

Your partisan NO vote against Judge Gorsuch earned you my NO vote in your next election.

+100

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just Durbin being Durbin.

I got the same form letter back.

My response to him:

Sen. Durbin,

All recent SCOTUS nominees have followed the lead set by Justice Ginsburg of not answering hypothetical questions. Judge Gorsuch answered exactly as Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor did and you voted for them.

I

The vote for Justice Sotomayor was 68-31 which included 9 Republican votes and Justice Kagan won approval by a vote of 63-37 with 5 Republican votes. I can only hope Judge Gorsuch, who many say is more qualified than the two previous nominees, is extended the same courtesy by the Democrats.

Your partisan NO vote against Judge Gorsuch earned you my NO vote in your next election.

+100

I failed to mention that Justice Ginsburg, who initiated the no hypothetical question strategy , was confirmed by a vote of 96-3. Durbin is a partisan hack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just Durbin being Durbin.

I got the same form letter back.

My response to him:

Sen. Durbin,

All recent SCOTUS nominees have followed the lead set by Justice Ginsburg of not answering hypothetical questions. Judge Gorsuch answered exactly as Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor did and you voted for them.

I

The vote for Justice Sotomayor was 68-31 which included 9 Republican votes and Justice Kagan won approval by a vote of 63-37 with 5 Republican votes. I can only hope Judge Gorsuch, who many say is more qualified than the two previous nominees, is extended the same courtesy by the Democrats.

Your partisan NO vote against Judge Gorsuch earned you my NO vote in your next election.

+100

I failed to mention that Justice Ginsburg, who initiated the no hypothetical question strategy , was confirmed by a vote of 96-3. Durbin is a partisan hack.

 

 

We're Republicans, when they denied Garland a hearing OR a vote, "partisan hacks"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just Durbin being Durbin.

I got the same form letter back.

My response to him:

Sen. Durbin,

All recent SCOTUS nominees have followed the lead set by Justice Ginsburg of not answering hypothetical questions. Judge Gorsuch answered exactly as Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor did and you voted for them.

I

The vote for Justice Sotomayor was 68-31 which included 9 Republican votes and Justice Kagan won approval by a vote of 63-37 with 5 Republican votes. I can only hope Judge Gorsuch, who many say is more qualified than the two previous nominees, is extended the same courtesy by the Democrats.

Your partisan NO vote against Judge Gorsuch earned you my NO vote in your next election.

+100

I failed to mention that Justice Ginsburg, who initiated the no hypothetical question strategy , was confirmed by a vote of 96-3. Durbin is a partisan hack.

 

 

We're Republicans, when they denied Garland a hearing OR a vote, "partisan hacks"?

No more than Biden and his comrades were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Just Durbin being Durbin.

I got the same form letter back.

My response to him:

Sen. Durbin,

All recent SCOTUS nominees have followed the lead set by Justice Ginsburg of not answering hypothetical questions. Judge Gorsuch answered exactly as Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor did and you voted for them.

I

The vote for Justice Sotomayor was 68-31 which included 9 Republican votes and Justice Kagan won approval by a vote of 63-37 with 5 Republican votes. I can only hope Judge Gorsuch, who many say is more qualified than the two previous nominees, is extended the same courtesy by the Democrats.

Your partisan NO vote against Judge Gorsuch earned you my NO vote in your next election.

+100

I failed to mention that Justice Ginsburg, who initiated the no hypothetical question strategy , was confirmed by a vote of 96-3. Durbin is a partisan hack.

 

 

We're Republicans, when they denied Garland a hearing OR a vote, "partisan hacks"?

 

 

No, I believe they were fighting fire with fire. Turnabout if fair play, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't give into the Democrats whining or threats.

 

They have put the most illogical outrageous judges on the Supreme Court as well as the Circuit Courts of Appeal. What happened in Peruta is an outrage. If you've listened to the orals in Woolard and Kwong, it is obvious that these liberal judges in no way feel bound by the Constitution of the United States. Their hubris knows no bounds.

 

Its time to fricken stomp their f-ing guts out !

 

Pound them into the f-ing dirt, drive them like a tent peg!

 

Pull out the nuclear option, kick their communists *****, and restore some sanity to this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice that whenever the dems are the minority party, they're all about "reaching across the aisle" and "bipartisanship". Oh, and don't forget "we all have to work together".

 

When they're the majority party, like with the last president "elections have consequences". "Get to the back of the bus".

 

Funny how that works. Garland is another left wing judge by all accounts. I'm glad he never got a chance. We already have too many left wing judges on this court.

 

Hopefully some of them will retire soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't give into the Democrats whining or threats.

 

They have put the most illogical outrageous judges on the Supreme Court as well as the Circuit Courts of Appeal. What happened in Peruta is an outrage. If you've listened to the orals in Woolard and Kwong, it is obvious that these liberal judges in no way feel bound by the Constitution of the United States. Their hubris knows no bounds.

 

Its time to fricken stomp their f-ing guts out !

 

Pound them into the f-ing dirt, drive them like a tent peg!

 

Pull out the nuclear option, kick their communists *****, and restore some sanity to this country.

Don't sugar coat it... tell us what you really think! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in 2016, there’s an actual vacancy on the high court, while in 1992, there was not. People forget the rest of what Biden said on the Senate floor. in the same remarks, Biden added that if the then-Republican president “consults and cooperates with the Senate, or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.”

 

That doesn’t sound like a call for a partisan blockade against any and all nominees
There’s also the matter of the date: Biden’s 1992 speech was delivered at the end of June, not long before Congress’ summer recess. That’s not at all similar to declaring in mid-February that a Supreme Court vacancy must go unfilled for a year.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

in 2016, there’s an actual vacancy on the high court, while in 1992, there was not. People forget the rest of what Biden said on the Senate floor. in the same remarks, Biden added that if the then-Republican president “consults and cooperates with the Senate, or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.”

 

That doesn’t sound like a call for a partisan blockade against any and all nominees
There’s also the matter of the date: Biden’s 1992 speech was delivered at the end of June, not long before Congress’ summer recess. That’s not at all similar to declaring in mid-February that a Supreme Court vacancy must go unfilled for a year.

 

Reaper, are you a gun owner? Would you rather have anti-gun Garland as a tie breaker over Gorsuch? What's your point from a 2nd Amendment standpoint?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chickens coming home to roost. GOP did the same for last 8 years (mostly). If the senate goes nuclear and gets rid of the filibuster, that means more conservative judges. That seems like the play here.

And how many hundreds of bills did Harry not call for a vote over the last 6 years? Who are the real obstructionists? not always the GOP but dems also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every Illinois/Republican gun bill that was drug thru the crack of Madigan's rear deserved a vote. Every Republican bill Harry Reid wadded up and dropped into the circular file deserved a vote. Political agendas poisoned and killed principals a long time ago. You can have targeted outrage for what good it does, but it would be foolish for one side to "play fair" because the other side cries foul, all the while they are stabbing them in the back.

 

Well said!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just Durbin being Durbin.

I got the same form letter back.

My response to him:

Sen. Durbin,

All recent SCOTUS nominees have followed the lead set by Justice Ginsburg of not answering hypothetical questions. Judge Gorsuch answered exactly as Justice Kagan and Justice Sotomayor did and you voted for them.

I

The vote for Justice Sotomayor was 68-31 which included 9 Republican votes and Justice Kagan won approval by a vote of 63-37 with 5 Republican votes. I can only hope Judge Gorsuch, who many say is more qualified than the two previous nominees, is extended the same courtesy by the Democrats.

Your partisan NO vote against Judge Gorsuch earned you my NO vote in your next election.

+100

I failed to mention that Justice Ginsburg, who initiated the no hypothetical question strategy , was confirmed by a vote of 96-3. Durbin is a partisan hack.

We're Republicans, when they denied Garland a hearing OR a vote, "partisan hacks"?

 

Do you think he would have gotten enough votes. I think not voting ended in the same result.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did he get nominated yet? Can't find it anywhere?

They are still on the floor tonight with a vote expected Friday

 

..."The Senate is headed for a second long night as lawmakers battle over Neil Gorsuch's Supreme Court nomination.

 

Senators are expected to stay on the Senate floor debating President Trump's nominee late into Wednesday night after Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) kept the Senate in all night to protest Gorsuch's nomination"...

 

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/327523-senate-heads-for-second-late-night-amid-supreme-court-fight

 

Being broadcast on CSPAN2... Al Franken is speaking now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...