Justice Scalia dead

[brutal]

"What difference does it make?"

If Senate delays an appointment past November, Hillary will just put in her choice.

Face it, 8 years of Hillary, then 8 years of Chelsea. We're all fucked.

[Gcompact30]

RIP and thanks for serving your Country

[theGinsue]

For those of you who don't see the possible problems here or are saying folks are being too dramatic, consider that we won in the Heller a d Macdonald decisions by a 5-4 vote each time. With Justice Scalia's passing the court is currently split evenly. While unusual, and previously decided that it requires more than just the belief that a previous decision was improperly made, the Supreme Court CAN reverse its previous decisions. It just takes one changed vote. Given the agenda of the Left, I'm not particularly hopeful that as unusual as it might be that reversing it's previous decisions wouldn't be something undertaken by a left-leaning SCOTUS. In fact, I'd expect such behavior. The balance it currently even, but that will change once a new Justice is appointed. Whether this goes left or right will depend on The Senate and the outcome of the next Presidential election.

What's worse is it's still expected that 2 Justices will retire in short order; one of those being Justice Kennedy who was appointed by Reagan. If the Senate doesn't hold the line on the next appointment until the after the election the vacant seat will surely go to a liberal, turning the balance of power to the left. At that point, even if a conservative is elected as our next POTUS, we'd still be outweighed in the SCOTUS at 5-4. But, if a liberal takes the election, then they'd likely get at least 1 appointment which would put the balance at 6-3 (or worse) in the liberals favor. This could be a nearly potentially irreversible power change in favor of the liberals for at least a couple of decades.

Folks, most of the freedoms guaranteed to us by the Constitution, freedoms that you continue to enjoy, are only still valid because of narrow victories in SCOTUS. The liberals goal is to dismantle the Constitution and the SCOTUS has been the only thing standing in their way. With a re-balanace to their favor, that protection ends.

Am I concerned about this current situation? Yes, I'd be foolish or naive not to be.

[Irving]

Lots of bad things can happen from all sorts of situations. It does me zero benefit to spend even a second worrying about things I can't change. Just keep moving forward to carve out a little piece of the world for myself. If obstacles never came up, everyone would already be there.

[Bailey Guns]

I have a question, when was the last time that the conservatively held Supreme Court ruled on a decision that has positively affected any of your day to day lives?

You should probably Google that if you don't know. There are quite a few.

[jslo]

Anything the SCOTUS takes on that results in a 4 to 4 vote will revert back to the lower courts decision. So now the lower courts, potentially, will have more power. So keep an eye on the liberal appellate courts. Their rulings are what we may be living under.

[KestrelBike]

The current record for length of time a Senate has held up a nomination is 125 days.

Source please? If so, we're f'ed. I do not trust the ability of our senate one damned bit to uphold their end of the bargain. I agree with Bailey 110% about not voting 3rd party, but if they get to shove in another sotomayor/rbg (kagen sometimes shows brief, distant lightning-flashes of intelligence, at least on paper) then I will have lost a f*ckton of faith in a "republican" legislature. What good's voting them out if they keep f'ing us over? We've had 2 major victories in congress (2010 house, 2014 senate) yet things are worse than ever. A leftist SCJ appointment before Jan 2017 will be the last straw.

I have a question, when was the last time that the conservatively held Supreme Court ruled on a decision that has positively affected any of your day to day lives? Honest question, because the only other thing I can think of in recent memory that the SCOTUS ruled on that affected anybody's day to day lives on here was ruling that the ACA wasn't a tax and therefore was constitutional. That affected a ton people on here extremely negatively, but wasn't that the same Supreme Court as we had yesterday? I just don't see the big doom and gloom problem with a lot of these federal posts that people lose their minds over. It RARELY affects your day to day lives. And even if it did most of us would probably just go on living like it didn't.

However, it's never a good thing when someone passes, so RIP.

Texas V. Johnson has protected us in ways that we can't see. It isn't always "Oh the Supremes just put bread in our basket!" but more like "The Supremes just stopped a gang from taking bread out of our basket." Just like Miller. ETA: This was also a 5-4 opinion, btw, in which Reagan-appointed "R" Sandra Day O'Connor voted for the dissent.

[Gman]

It's pretty easy to see how this can go bad. The Supremes have already ruled that we have to buy a product (health insurance) because it is a "tax".

The Constitution means whatever the SCOTUS says it means.

[Skip]

For those of you who don't see the possible problems here or are saying folks are being too dramatic, consider that we won in the Heller a d Macdonald decisions by a 5-4 vote each time.

[snip]

Am I concerned about this current situation? Yes, I'd be foolish or naive not to be.

I agree it's worse than just "troublesome." There is a good chance ARs and maybe even semi-auto rifles will now be banned. Even better chance that the net is cast even wider on "prohibited persons" with less due process.

But my point on page 4 is that we aren't going to Australia style confiscation just yet without the government (the Executive and Legislation have already lost credibility) losing all credibility. I would hope such an act would create grave consequences. But I am surprised each day with how much BS people take even knowing where this goes.

The battle now will be Liberals feeling that Obama's nominee should sail right onto the Court and calling anyone who disagrees a racist while Conservatives are trying to hold out until Nov (and longer if a Republican wins). I could see Ginsburg making things really interesting if she announces her retirement before then as well--Obama would have the opportunity to seat four Justices and turn the court 6-3 in his favor.

[Skip]

Scalia's death could change court on abortion, race, climate

Colorado struck down a local voucher program last year on those grounds, as has the Florida Supreme Court. Scalia, along with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, John Roberts and Anthony Kennedy had indicated a willingness to accept the argument that banning state lawmakers from funding religious schools, if a democratic majority wants to, would impede the free exercise of religion.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/0...#ixzz406pa2DzL

So we had a chance to get our school vouchers back too.