Jump to content

Trump's Supreme Court Pick

lawman

By lawman
in National Politics

Recommended Posts

GTX63 Member

GTX63

Posted
Posted

Don't know the guy, but I'm sure the networks, and we all know which ones, are writing out checks to their moles for the low down and forwarding all the photoshopped pics and documents to Mr. Schumer.

TRJ Member

TRJ

Posted
Posted

My guess, this guy is the head fake to take the networks off guard when someone else is named.

 

If he is the real guy, and is a Scalia worthy replacement...great. I question how he could clerk for Kennedy and not be moderate.

soundguy Member

soundguy

Posted
Posted

My guess, this guy is the head fake to take the networks off guard when someone else is named.

 

If he is the real guy, and is a Scalia worthy replacement...great. I question how he could clerk for Kennedy and not be moderate.

 

Who you work for or learn from is not always an indication of your beliefs.

ilphil Member

ilphil

Posted
Posted

Doing some reading this guy is as bad if not worse than Kennedy. :no:

 

United States v. Games-Perez :no:

 

To be clear he has a style like Scalia, but rulings like Kennedy. :no:

What in his dissent leads you to that conclusion?

According to what I have read elsewhere, his opinion in the dissent was later agreed to by a unanimous vote of SCOTUS.

Just wondering...

Johnnybgood Member

Johnnybgood

Posted
Posted

I can actually read and understand his dissent. He actually makes sense. I think I like him.

ilphil Member

ilphil

Posted
Posted

He should be confirmed, but it won't be by a unanimous voice vote.

In today's climate I don't think Madison or Franklin would get a unanimous vote in the Senate. :no:

DD123 Member

DD123

Posted
Posted

He's a guy who routinely rules against anything that empowers the government. He's also an originalist and a textualist.

 

He gets my nomination. Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that he's a horrible candidate that doesn't view law in the modern view of law. If that's not a ringing endorsement for the guy, I don't know what is. She's nuttier than squirrel turds.

DD123 Member

DD123

Posted
Posted

So is this guy like Kennedy or Scalia?

He's slightly to the right of Scalia.

 

ETA: Trump had two judges come out to DC, Gorsuch is to the right of Scalia, the other guy is right around Kennedy on the political spectrum. It's almost impossible to have an originalist and textualist anywhere near Kennedy.

X Ring Member

X Ring

Posted
Posted

He's a guy who routinely rules against anything that empowers the government. He's also an originalist and a textualist.

 

He gets my nomination. Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that he's a horrible candidate that doesn't view law in the modern view of law. If that's not a ringing endorsement for the guy, I don't know what is. She's nuttier than squirrel turds.

 

Thread winner!!!

Lou Member

Lou

Posted
Posted

He's a guy who routinely rules against anything that empowers the government. He's also an originalist and a textualist.

 

He gets my nomination. Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that he's a horrible candidate that doesn't view law in the modern view of law. If that's not a ringing endorsement for the guy, I don't know what is. She's nuttier than squirrel turds.

 

If Pelosi ( who is in the House and has no part in the confirmation process) doesn't like him it's the ultimate endorsement

GTX63 Member

GTX63

Posted
Posted

The senate judiciary committee screamers will be hammering him over religion, abortion, immigration and voting rights. The public self unscrewing of heads on the left is becoming must see tv.

BobPistol Member

BobPistol

Posted
Posted

He's a guy who routinely rules against anything that empowers the government.

 

That's enough for me! :) Less money for cronies!

 

The senate judiciary committee screamers will be hammering him over religion, abortion, immigration and voting rights. The public self unscrewing of heads on the left is becoming must see tv.

 

Now what's gonna happen when Trump does things during the confirmation process that causes more outrages, taking the media's focus off the SCOTUS nominee? Go ahead filibuster, the media's harping on a different story and ignoring yours.

 

Maybe.

CILhunter Member

CILhunter

Posted
Posted

The funny thing is, Judge Gorsuch was approved by the Senate unanimously less than 10 years ago. Many of these same Senators who are now wringing their hands and whining, thought that he was perfectly good for the 10th Circuit. He won't get through on a voice vote, but at the end of the day he will get confirmed. Only "better" choice would have been Judge William Prior, but that would be a really contentious nomination fight, more along the lines of the Robert Bork mess. This one should be significantly easier.

GTX63 Member

GTX63

Posted
Posted

An ill equipped and underpowered left as well as the media is getting over run with Trump edicts multiple times each day, and they don't know what to do.

 

It's I Love Lucy working the chocolate factory conveyor belt and the hot button topics and issues are just coming in faster than can be handled.

gregivq Member

gregivq

Posted
Posted

The funny thing is, Judge Gorsuch was approved by the Senate unanimously less than 10 years ago. Many of these same Senators who are now wringing their hands and whining, thought that he was perfectly good for the 10th Circuit. He won't get through on a voice vote, but at the end of the day he will get confirmed. Only "better" choice would have been Judge William Prior, but that would be a really contentious nomination fight, more along the lines of the Robert Bork mess. This one should be significantly easier.

Good point. I like the nomination and I'm really curious how this is going to play out. Democratic standoff? New nominee?

mrmagloo Member

mrmagloo

Posted
Posted

 

If Pelosi ( who is in the House and has no part in the confirmation process) doesn't like him it's the ultimate endorsement

 

 

I couldn't put it any better than that. I've never heard of the guy before, but I saw her little news clip last night, and I knew immediately Trump hit a grand slam. YES! Now, if we can get Ginsburg and Breyer to mosey on, and get those seats filled with nice solid conservatives, we will be set for the next couple of decades.

Hap Member

Hap

Posted
Posted

Anyone else think this is a good time to take a few hours to reflect on how glad we are that we didn't hear Her Royal Hillaryness's chosen 2A-slayer, whoever that might have been, announced last night?

HeavyDuty Member

HeavyDuty

Posted
Posted
Some of you probably aren't going to like this, but I think the SC functions best when it's in balance - which this appointment would do. I think a SC biased heavily to either side of the political spectrum is dangerous.
GWBH Member

GWBH

Posted
Posted

 

He's a guy who routinely rules against anything that empowers the government. He's also an originalist and a textualist.

 

He gets my nomination. Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that he's a horrible candidate that doesn't view law in the modern view of law. If that's not a ringing endorsement for the guy, I don't know what is. She's nuttier than squirrel turds.

If Pelosi ( who is in the House and has no part in the confirmation process) doesn't like him it's the ultimate endorsement

 

I agree with Lou... except Pelosi is in the wrong "house"... another one comes to mind. (Has something to do with squirrels as DD123 mentioned!)

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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