Jump to content

President Donald J. Trump's Supreme Court Associate Justice Kavanaugh


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said:

Bear in mind that the Cruz/Paul stuff is all entirely speculative.

 

Senator Paul has never voiced anything that could be construed as objection to Kavanaugh's nomination.  Mitch McConnell reportedly told the White House that Kavanaugh might have a harder time getting through Paul; though Paul himself has said "I look forward to the upcoming hearings, reviewing the record, and meeting personally with Judge Kavanaugh, with an open mind." on his twitter account.

 

While Senator Cruz released the following statement on his official Congressional website: 

 

"By any measure, Judge Kavanaugh is one of the most respected federal judges in the country and I look forward to supporting his nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. For over a decade, Judge Kavanaugh has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, often referred to as the second highest court in the land. He has over 300 published opinions, with a strong record of defending the Second Amendment, safeguarding the separation of powers, reining in the unchecked power of federal agencies, and preserving our precious religious liberties.

 

"Senate Democrats, sadly, will try to demagogue this nomination, but their efforts will not be successful. I am confident that the Senate will take up his nomination quickly, and I fully expect that he will be confirmed before the first Monday in October, the beginning of the Supreme Court's Term. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I look forward to his confirmation hearing, where Judge Kavanaugh will have the opportunity to demonstrate to the American people that he will uphold the rule of law and interpret the Constitution according to its original meaning."

 

 

Well, that's actually encouraging. Thanks! (seriously)

 

 

Edited by joesixpack
  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Ultimately I think they are just posturing, and are using this to try and get something that they want passed later down the line. Not sure what that may be but just what I think.

Yup.  Most politicians actions are motivated by their next campaign and Cruz absolutely fits that category.  How quickly he went from not endorsing Trump to phone banking for him was comical after his donors threatened to pull their money for his 2018 campaign.  Making it look like he did everything he could to make sure Kavanaugh is the next Scalia enhances his reelection chances.  He pry has a 2024 presidential campaign in mind too.

 

Paul's a little harder to figure out as he may actually care about his principles....or he's gearing up for a 2024 run and his libertarian leanings may separate him from the pack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1642402.gif

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

‘THIS ISN’T JOURNALISM:’ Charles C.W. Cooke blasts single-sourced NBC News report on Kennedy-WH/Trump negotiation for Kavanaugh.

 

 

 

TYLER O’NEIL: Blame the Left for Making the Supreme Court Too Political. “The ‘living Constitution’ let loose the dogs of political warfare

 

 

Glenn Reynold's TAKE ON THE KAVANAUGH APPOINTMENT is up at USA Today.

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, B-Man said:

1642402.gif

 

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

‘THIS ISN’T JOURNALISM:’ Charles C.W. Cooke blasts single-sourced NBC News report on Kennedy-WH/Trump negotiation for Kavanaugh.

 

 

 

TYLER O’NEIL: Blame the Left for Making the Supreme Court Too Political. “The ‘living Constitution’ let loose the dogs of political warfare

 

 

Glenn Reynold's TAKE ON THE KAVANAUGH APPOINTMENT is up at USA Today.

 

 

This is why the Supreme Court should have term limits. The idea that Justices can leverage their lifetime appointments into power over who replaces them is ridiculous.

 

Reminder: the same people would praise Ginsburg if she did this, for maintaining continuity and balance in the court.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:
 

This is why the Supreme Court should have term limits. The idea that Justices can leverage their lifetime appointments into power over who replaces them is ridiculous.

 

Reminder: the same people would praise Ginsburg if she did this, for maintaining continuity and balance in the court.

 

Well, we should have term limits for ALL branches of government.

 

People serving 20, 30 years in congress is NOT good.

 

  • Like (+1) 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, joesixpack said:

 

Why not?

 

She's pretty much a Democrat, you know.

 

 

Well, because without having seen her position yet on Judge Kavanaugh, do expect it is likely she will do some grandstanding.  Though if she is truly opposed to Barrett, she might see this choice as her best option to get a judge she can accept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

angry-mob_new.jpg

 

‘You will make MILLIONS of enemies’: Sen. Doug Jones had better prepare to be mobbed over SCOTUS vote

Remember last December when Hollywood-backed Doug Jones won the Senate race against Roy Moore, a Republican candidate so radioactive that Sen. Jeff Flake posted a photo of the campaign donation check he wrote to the Jones campaign?

 

Alyssa Milano literally sobbed when Jones won; no, really, she posted video of herself crying tears of joy. But all of those celebrity backers are having second thoughts as a July 8 tweet about Jones saying “he could vote either way” on President Trump’s SCOTUS pick makes the rounds.

 

 

Reaction from the Left was swift.........Examples at the link:

 

 

 

The authoritarian left in action.

Goose step in tight formation or become an enemy to almighty 'progress'.

 

 

 

 

 

Reminder:

 

Roy Moore, The Senator From Alabama? 

 

 

 

.

 

 

.

Edited by B-Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ruth Bader Ginsburg Encased In Carbonite Until Next Court Session

July 10, 2018
ginsbonite-696x394.jpg
 

WASHINGTON, D.C.—With President Trump now nominating his second justice to the Supreme Court, a lot of attention is being paid to the oldest Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Critics fear that if Trump replaces her, it would shift the court far to the right. She’s in fine health for now, though, according to the technicians that have frozen her in carbonite until the next term of the Supreme Court.

 

As Ginsburg was lowered into the carbonite freezing chamber, she bravely looked up at her fellow liberal justices, who said, “I love you.” She reportedly replied, “Huh?”

 

.https://babylonbee.com/news/ruth-bader-ginsburg-encased-in-carbonite-until-next-court-session/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=dwbrand

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Haha (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/10/2018 at 8:55 AM, joesixpack said:

I bet that milquetoast Collins proves to be a real pain in the ass.

 

 

 

She voted the R line 90% of the time last year. In doing so, she's the most liberal R there is, but wouldn't you rather have some independently minded Congress people instead of the lemming Rs and Ds?

 

I'm encouraged by anyone who can break with the party line and perhaps (?) work across the aisle. At 90%, it's not that encouraging but since she's leading the pack, I have to congratulate someone for coming in first on Independent or Moderate thought.   

Edited by BeginnersMind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dick Durbin: We must do everything we can to stop Trump's pick, even if it means we lose more Senate seats.

 

Quote

“For vulnerable Democrats running for re-election, Durbin’s message is that this is a you’ll-never-eat-lunch-in-this-town-again vote,” says Steven Law, president of the Senate Leadership Fund. “And that a vote to confirm the president’s nominee will be treated by party activists as an act of treason.”

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

I thought this one was well done...


 

this-one.jpg

Are the two really that different?  For all the upset and drama with this pick, in the end it's just a guy who replaces another guy where the only difference will pry be more conservative on a few social issues (gay marriage, abortion, affirmative action), but will make similar decisions on big businesses, voting rights, the 2nd amendment, and campaign spending that conservatives are happy about.  Just making a big deal out of nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Are the two really that different?  For all the upset and drama with this pick, in the end it's just a guy who replaces another guy where the only difference will pry be more conservative on a few social issues (gay marriage, abortion, affirmative action), but will make similar decisions on big businesses, voting rights, the 2nd amendment, and campaign spending that conservatives are happy about.  Just making a big deal out of nothing.

I’d say they have a good shot at overturning Roe v Wade. Very very good shot. 

 

This is a big swing appointment. He’s more centrist than Gorsuch but not as much as Kennedy. Will be interesting to see how far to the liberal side he moves once appointed. Except Thomas, they all move that way a bit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

Are the two really that different?  For all the upset and drama with this pick, in the end it's just a guy who replaces another guy where the only difference will pry be more conservative on a few social issues (gay marriage, abortion, affirmative action), but will make similar decisions on big businesses, voting rights, the 2nd amendment, and campaign spending that conservatives are happy about.  Just making a big deal out of nothing.

 

I'd like to see Campus Reform put together a video asking students what they think about Kavanaugh's opinions on some issues, but replace them with Kennedy's opinions, and see how many call them Raysis or Notsee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said:

I’d say they have a good shot at overturning Roe v Wade. Very very good shot. 

 

This is a big swing appointment. He’s more centrist than Gorsuch but not as much as Kennedy. Will be interesting to see how far to the liberal side he moves once appointed. Except Thomas, they all move that way a bit. 

It's pry more likely they'll slowly allow states through a series of rulings to put more restrictions on abortions like they did in Casey vs. Planned Parenthood in the early 90's.

 

42 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

 

I'd like to see Campus Reform put together a video asking students what they think about Kavanaugh's opinions on some issues, but replace them with Kennedy's opinions, and see how many call them Raysis or Notsee

I'd like to see real campus reform and bar useless majors like liberal arts and sociology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BeginnersMind said:

I’d say they have a good shot at overturning Roe v Wade. Very very good shot. 

 

This is a big swing appointment. He’s more centrist than Gorsuch but not as much as Kennedy. Will be interesting to see how far to the liberal side he moves once appointed. Except Thomas, they all move that way a bit. 

 

Except this has been established as precedent and Kavanaugh said he wont overturn it due to that fact. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Except this has been established as precedent and Kavanaugh said he wont overturn it due to that fact. 

 

it will be overturned over the next 6.5 years, it will go back to the states, where it should have always been

 

i have read that 22 will outlaw it

 

may we all live in peace

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

 

Be careful Doc. Keep talking like this and you'll never get a set at the Red Hen.

Who would want to? I understand from a big-time source that it is dirty on the outside, so it must be dirty on the inside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Except this has been established as precedent and Kavanaugh said he wont overturn it due to that fact. 

 

Actually what he has said is that, as a lower court judge, he had to follow Supreme Court precedent. 

 

Once he's on the Supreme Court itself, he's under no obligation to follow those decisions. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Actually what he has said is that, as a lower court judge, he had to follow Supreme Court precedent. 

 

Once he's on the Supreme Court itself, he's under no obligation to follow those decisions. 

 

 

Perhaps, but he also said it has been reaffirmed several times, implying that its pretty established as the law. This type of fear mongering of Roe v Wade has been going on for 30 years at least. I think its time to give it a rest

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bray Wyatt said:

 

Perhaps, but he also said it has been reaffirmed several times, implying that its pretty established as the law. This type of fear mongering of Roe v Wade has been going on for 30 years at least. I think its time to give it a rest

 

Can't do that while it's still useful to leftists.  If they can't rile up 20-somethings over their "right" to cut up and vacuum out a tiny human, how will they ever get out the midterm vote?

 

Aside anecdote: I was sitting in a small movie theater a few days after Kennedy retired and some boomers took three seats across the aisle from me.  They started talking about Kennedy's retirement and one old B word was harping on and on about how distressed she was that her daughters might have some difficulty procuring abortions in the future.

 

Bitching and moaning about your daughter losing the right to kill your grandchildren.  If that's not peak boomerism I don't know what is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...