Close
Page 1 of 6 123456 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53
  1. #1
    Rebuilt from Salvage TFOGGER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    7,789

    Default Trump releases list of 3 possibilities for Supreme Court vacancy

    http://www.npr.org/2017/01/24/511493...-supreme-court

    President Trump says he plans to announce his pick for the U.S. Supreme Court next week.The Trump administration has begun to float specific names for the high court's vacancy. The consensus seems to be that among the finalists on Trump's shortlist are Neil Gorsuch, a judge on the federal appeals court based in Denver; Judge William H. Pryor Jr. of Alabama, who served on the federal appeals court based in Atlanta; and Judge Thomas Hardiman of Pittsburgh, who serves on the 3rd Circuit Federal Court of Appeals.
    All were appointed to their current positions by President George W. Bush and are considered hardcore conservatives, but there the similarity ends.
    POLITICS

    Trump Gives Green Light To Keystone, Dakota Access Pipelines




    Gorsuch, 49, is considered a cerebral proponent of "originalism," the idea that the Constitution should be interpreted as the Founding Fathers would have more than 200 years ago, and of "textualism," the idea that statutes should be interpreted literally, without considering the legislative history and underlying purpose of the law. The Colorado native is Ivy League-educated, and while in undergraduate school at Columbia University, co-founded a newspaper aimed at rebutting what he considered the dominant liberal and "politically correct" philosophy on campus. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he also earned a doctorate in legal philosophy at Oxford University, where he studied as a Marshall scholar.
    In private practice, he represented mostly corporate clients, and in 2005 he became principal deputy associate attorney general in the Bush administration Justice Department. A year later he was nominated to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, where he has earned a reputation as a scholarly conservative with a flair for writing vividly that is similar to — though perhaps not as sharp in tone as — Justice Antonin Scalia, the conservative icon whose death last year created the current Supreme Court vacancy.

    Though Democrats would very likely oppose a Gorsuch nomination in large numbers, he is seen as less of a lightning rod than Judge Pryor, who famously called Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court's 1973 abortion decision, "the worst abomination of constitutional law in our history."
    Educated at Northeast Louisiana University and Tulane Law School, Pryor, 54, is a protege of Trump's nominee for attorney general, Sen. Jeff Sessions. When Sessions served as Alabama state attorney general, Pryor was his deputy and succeeded him when Sessions was elected to the U.S. Senate.
    POLITICS

    Republicans Eye 'Once In A Generation' Chance At Tax Overhaul




    As state attorney general, Pryor filed a brief that supported the right of states to make consenting private homosexual conduct a crime. "The states should not be required to accept, as a matter of constitutional doctrine, that homosexual activity is harmless and does not expose both the individual and the public to deleterious spiritual and physical consequences," Pryor wrote in the brief.
    Pryor's nomination to the federal appeals court in 2003 was blocked by Senate Democrats until President Bush gave him a temporary appointment while the Senate was in recess. Thereafter, he was confirmed in a deal brokered by centrist Republicans and Democrats that allowed some pending nominees to go through, but not others.
    Pryor, a devout Roman Catholic, is a particular favorite among evangelicals and other social conservatives, but he was criticized by some conservative activists when, as state attorney general, he led the charge in removing Alabama's chief justice for refusing to obey a federal court order to take a Ten Commandments monument out of the courthouse.
    A Pryor nomination would undoubtedly spark a major confirmation fight — a fight that Democrats are itching for. They are angry over the nearly yearlong refusal by Republicans to consider President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland, a stalling tactic that set a historic precedent.
    POLITICS

    President Trump's Inaugural Address, Annotated




    A third short-lister is Judge Hardiman, educated at Notre Dame and Georgetown Law School. Like other potential nominees on the short list, the 51-year-old has a conservative record, in his case with particular emphasis on the rights of gun owners.
    Regardless of which judge is picked by President Trump for nomination to the nation's highest court, none would change the 5-to-4 conservative majority that has prevailed, for the most part, for decades; anyone Trump nominates would be replacing Justice Scalia — in short, a conservative for a conservative.
    It is the next Trump Supreme Court nomination that very likely would change things dramatically, converting a conservative 5-to-4 majority that sometimes flips the other way when one of the conservatives, usually Justice Anthony Kennedy, votes with the court's four liberals to make a more liberal majority. With one more appointment, there would be a 6-to-3 majority, a vote to spare. And lots of long-standing precedents could fall, including Roe v. Wade.
    Indeed, the actuarial possibility of that happening is considerable. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court's leading liberal, will turn 84 in March; Justice Anthony Kennedy, the court's so-called swing justice, is 80; and Justice Stephen Breyer, another of the liberal justices, is 78. So it is entirely possible that Trump could get two or three more appointments, leaving just two liberal justices on the court and providing conservatives with an overwhelming majority that could dramatically change the law for generations to come.
    Light a fire for a man, and he'll be warm for a day, light a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life...

    Discussion is an exchange of intelligence. Argument is an exchange of
    ignorance. Ever found a liberal that you can have a discussion with?

  2. #2
    Joe_K
    Guest

    Default

    No issues with any of them.

    Velocitas, Opprimere,
    Violentia Operandi

  3. #3
    Rebuilt from Salvage TFOGGER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    7,789

    Default

    I think my order of preference would be Gorsuch, then Hardiman. I lean more libertarian than social conservative, and believe that the less the government is involved in our daily lives, the better, so judges that legislate from the bench on social issues from either side of the aisle kind of piss me off. Thus, Pryor is a no-go for me.
    Last edited by TFOGGER; 01-24-2017 at 22:13.
    Light a fire for a man, and he'll be warm for a day, light a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life...

    Discussion is an exchange of intelligence. Argument is an exchange of
    ignorance. Ever found a liberal that you can have a discussion with?

  4. #4
    MODFATHER cstone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    7,472

    Default

    A 7-2 court. It almost sends a tingle up my leg.
    Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges.

    My Feedback

  5. #5
    QUITTER Irving's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    46,527
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cstone View Post
    A 7-2 court. It almost sends a tingle up my leg.
    That's a far sight better than sending a trickle down your leg.
    "There are no finger prints under water."

  6. #6
    Grand Master Know It All DOC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Lakewood
    Posts
    2,880

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cstone View Post
    A 7-2 court. It almost sends a tingle up my leg.
    This!!!!
    Who are you to want to escape a thugs bullet? That is only a personal prejudice, ( Atlas Shrugged)
    "Those that don't watch the old media are uninformed, those that do watch the old media are misinformed." - Mark Twain

  7. #7
    The "Godfather" of COAR Great-Kazoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Washboard Alley, AZ.
    Posts
    48,100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TFOGGER View Post
    I think my order of preference would be Gorsuch, then Hardiman. I lean more libertarian than social conservative, and believe that the less the government is involved in our daily lives, the better, so judges that legislate from the bench on social issues from either side of the aisle kind of piss me off. Thus, Pryor is a no-go for me.
    Double check.
    The Great Kazoo's Feedback

    "when you're happy you enjoy the melody but, when you're broken you understand the lyrics".

  8. #8
    Zombie Slayer Aloha_Shooter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Posts
    6,564

    Default

    A 7-2 court will be hard to get to. Replacing Scalia with a like mind will just keep it at 5-4 or 4-5 depending on the case. Getting to 7-2 would require getting past Ginsburg (who could go at any time) to replace Kennedy (who shows no signs of infirmity or wanting to retire) or -- even more unlikely -- Kagan or Sotomayor -- plus we need to keep Thomas' seat firmly conservative. At this point, I'll just be happy with replacing Scalia with a like minded Constitutionalist or originalist and the prospect of replacing Ginsburg with any of the aforementioned prospects. Getting to replace Kennedy or Kagan or Sotomayor with a conservative (or hell, even a moderate as none of those three is even remotely moderate) would just be gravy.

  9. #9
    The "Godfather" of COAR Great-Kazoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Washboard Alley, AZ.
    Posts
    48,100

    Default

    Forget about Ginsberg. With Trump in office Ginsberg's stance now is, to quote C. Heston.

    From My Cold Dead Gavel
    The Great Kazoo's Feedback

    "when you're happy you enjoy the melody but, when you're broken you understand the lyrics".

  10. #10
    I am my own action figure
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Wheat Ridge
    Posts
    4,010
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TFOGGER View Post
    I think my order of preference would be Gorsuch, then Hardiman. I lean more libertarian than social conservative, and believe that the less the government is involved in our daily lives, the better, so judges that legislate from the bench on social issues from either side of the aisle kind of piss me off. Thus, Pryor is a no-go for me.
    Agree. However, I also believe that the defense of marriage act, forcing states to accept homosexual marriages and several other issues are powers that should have been left to the States, not mandated by the Federal Government.

    I strongly believe that the grandstanding by the Dems on Trumps Nominees, and the marches on Saturday were more about the SCOTUS nominees and Roe V. Wade than any other issue. I believe Morals are personal (Religious if you will) and can not be legislated. But any activity that actually harms another free person can be restricted by laws.

    EDIT: Gorsuch and Hardiman just announced to be the final two from which Trump will choose.
    Last edited by MarkCO; 01-25-2017 at 09:47.
    Good Shooting, MarkCO

    www.CarbonArms.us
    www.crci.org

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •