Justice Kennedy to step down

[tapeANaspirin2it]

The point me and DBS have been making for a couple of days is the opposite. Rather, Congress has willfully given up their power and duties to the courts in order to avoid being accountable to the voters. Democrats do it more but Republicans are not immune from criticism on this issue either.

Dems have decided it's easier getting 5 people to make laws than using elections or congress.

Case in point Roe v Wade. They are freaking out over it. Why? Because they never passed any laws. It's tenuous because they go by a court decision which could be reversed.

Why not just pass a proper abortion law if it's so popular with the public?

The SC can be overruled by Congress passing a constitutional amendment. But that would take a 2 thirds majority vote.

This is why liberals HATE the constitution, because when followed, it is brilliantly effective in making sure that the will of the people rules. And they hate the people. They want a system where a minority can rule on a whim.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Dems have decided it's easier getting 5 people to make laws than using elections or congress.

Case in point Roe v Wade. They are freaking out over it. Why? Because they never passed any laws. It's tenuous because they go by a court decision which could be reversed.

Why not just pass a proper abortion law if it's so popular with the public?

The SC can be overruled by Congress passing a constitutional amendment. But that would take a 2 thirds majority vote.

This is why liberals HATE the constitution, because when followed, it is brilliantly effective in making sure that the will of the people rules. And they hate the people. They want a system where a minority can rule on a whim.

And when the government is big enough, they get to do things like tell people what bathroom they can go into. Look that one up in the Federalist Papers.

 

[Coach]

It could be 7-2 or possibly even 8-1 slanted to the right before Trump’s 8 years are up.

I think 6-3 is fine. Pause for a moment, and just wonder the if Hillary Clinton was picking the judges and was President.

 

[Steeltime]

I think 6-3 is fine. Pause for a moment, and just wonder the if Hillary Clinton was picking the judges and was President.

I'm sure she would have picked a conservative to replace Scalia. You know, out of unity and respect for the other side.

 

[tapeANaspirin2it]

The Dems are the ones who changed the rules to make it only 50 votes to confirm a nominee. They are the fascists. Basically everything they support is ways to go around bi-partisanship. To eliminate their need to compromise.

Trump will get another nominee confirmed. I think he has a great opportunity if he has the chance at a third. If that happens, he should propose that the rule be changed back to 60 votes to confirm (i believe it used to be 60). The Dems would probably jump at that chance and it's the way it should be.

The Supreme court is too important a job that one party should be able to ram a nominee through with 0 votes from the other side.

Gridlock is the genius of the Constitution. It compels both sides to work together so only the best ideas get through. Nobody wins when we have a system where every few years laws are re-written to say the opposite.

 

[SteelChip]

I think 6-3 is fine. Pause for a moment, and just wonder the if Hillary Clinton was picking the judges and was President.

OR Maybe....

[

 

[DBS1970]

DBS, Congress cannot usurp the Supreme Court's power to review legislation to determine if it passes Constitutional muster. Such restriction would violate separation of powers, and the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected efforts by the Legislative and Executive branches to limit judicial review. Recently, for example, in a case called National Association of Manufacturers v. U.S. Department of Defense, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency cannot shelter its “waters of the United States” rule from judicial review by arbitrarily limiting where victims can sue.

The rule that the judicial branch is the final arbiter of the constitutionality of a statute, or indeed basically any action by the Executive or Legislative branches, dates back to 1803 and the landmark case, Marbury v. Madison, where the Supreme Court held, “it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”

The Constitution says otherwise.

The problem is that without congress doing its job we are defacto ruled by unelected unaccountable judges.

 

[Spike]

Things that make u go LOL


The conservative era of the Supreme Court is over

The conservative era of the Supreme Court is over Jun 29, 2016

After 45 years with a conservative majority, the Supreme Court appears to be entering a very different era.

The major rulings of this just-completed Supreme Court term show there are no longer five votes for a conservative result — a historic shift. From the time President Nixon's fourth court nominee was confirmed in 1971 until Justice Antonin Scalia's death in February, there have always been five ideologically conservative Republican appointees on the bench. No longer.

Indeed, if Hillary Clinton is elected president in November, a liberal majority may dominate the court for decades to come.

There will be three justices 79 or older in 2017: Ginsburg, Kennedy and Breyer. The next president, especially if he or she is a two-term president, likely will have several picks for the high court.

By next year there may be five liberal votes on issues such as campaign finance, the death penalty and gun control.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...vative-supreme-court-20160628-snap-story.html

-------------------------------


She got this!

hahahahaha

 

[deljzc]

Things that make u go LOL


The conservative era of the Supreme Court is over

The conservative era of the Supreme Court is over Jun 29, 2016

After 45 years with a conservative majority, the Supreme Court appears to be entering a very different era.

The major rulings of this just-completed Supreme Court term show there are no longer five votes for a conservative result — a historic shift. From the time President Nixon's fourth court nominee was confirmed in 1971 until Justice Antonin Scalia's death in February, there have always been five ideologically conservative Republican appointees on the bench. No longer.

Indeed, if Hillary Clinton is elected president in November, a liberal majority may dominate the court for decades to come.

There will be three justices 79 or older in 2017: Ginsburg, Kennedy and Breyer. The next president, especially if he or she is a two-term president, likely will have several picks for the high court.

By next year there may be five liberal votes on issues such as campaign finance, the death penalty and gun control.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-e...vative-supreme-court-20160628-snap-story.html

-------------------------------


She got this!

hahahahaha

Note that was written by a likely Marxist Russian who thinks Stalin just ****** up the purity of communism.

 

[Spike]

and this is how we're winning



Activists Mail Coat Hangers To GOP Senator Susan Collins

Social media activists say they are sending coat hangers to the office of Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) in a symbolic message about the legacy of anti-abortion policies and court decisions. They want to remind lawmakers about the urgency surrounding the replacement of retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.

The social media users are specifically targeting Collins, a key vote in the process to confirm President Donald Trump’s pick. The hashtag campaign appears to have started organically late last week, with participants tweeting #HangersForCollins. The users also shared screen grabs of online shopping carts with coat hangers to show they were purchasing the items with the intent of mailing it to Collins.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...me-court-abortion_us_5b3b5ff7e4b09e4a8b275b59

 

[Spike]

Trump has them all groveling now




Schumer privately asked Trump to nominate Merrick Garland to Supreme Court

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) privately urged President Trump in a phone conversation to nominate Merrick Garland, former President Obama's Supreme Court nominee from 2016, to replace the retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy.

The Washington Post reported on Thursday that Schumer told Trump in phone call that lasted less than five minutes on Tuesday that the move would help unite the country, noting that Democrats are still angry about Senate Republicans' refusal to act on Garland's nomination in the final year of Obama's presidency.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...-to-nominate-merrick-garland-to-supreme-court

--------------------

Sure Chuck, we'll get back to you on that

hahahahahahahaha

 

[Steelin]

Schumer is such an idiot.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Schumer privately asked Trump to nominate Merrick Garland to Supreme Court

I would have been okay with Garland. He was as Conservative a person as Bomma was likely to nominate knowing that he had a Republican Senate. I never thought the GOP should have let the appointment die on the vine because I knew this **** would happen when there was a Republican President.

 

[Sarge]

Trump has them all groveling now




The Washington Post reported on Thursday that Schumer told Trump in phone call that lasted less than five minutes on Tuesday that the move would help unite the country, noting that Democrats are still angry about Senate Republicans' refusal to act on Garland's nomination in the final year of Obama's presidency.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...-to-nominate-merrick-garland-to-supreme-court

--------------------

Sure Chuck, we'll get back to you on that

hahahahahahahaha

Unite the country? Name the last thing Chuck Schumer, or any democrat for that matter, did to unite the country. They do everything they can every damn day, mainly through identity politics, to divide this nation.

Typical--"Do what we want, and we won't be mad about you doing what we want." Give me a ******* break.

 

[Sarge]

I would have been okay with Garland. He was as Conservative a person as Bomma was likely to nominate knowing that he had a Republican Senate. I never thought the GOP should have let the appointment die on the vine because I knew this **** would happen when there was a Republican President.

So you think the Donald will follow Schumer's advice?

 

[Spike]

President Trump completes interviews of SCOTUS candidates, as list shrinks

Fox News is told that Trump has interviewed six candidates: Appeals court judges Brett Kavanaugh, Raymond Kethledge, Amy Coney Barrett, Amul Thapar, Joan Larsen and Thomas Hardiman. The interviews comprised seven conversations – Trump talked to one candidate twice.

Multiple sources indicated Kavanaugh, Kethledge and Barrett are currently the focus of attention.

The president and his vetting team have moved quickly ahead of an expected announcement on Monday.

While liberal advocacy groups and others are gearing up for a major confirmation fight, Trump is charging ahead with an imminent decision to fill the seat of retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, and potentially move the court more solidly to the right.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/05/trump-completes-interviews-supreme-court-candidates.html

----------------------

Oh yeah, GO AMY!

The lefty heads ‘bout to explode again!

 

[Vader]

I would have been okay with Garland. He was as Conservative a person as Bomma was likely to nominate knowing that he had a Republican Senate. I never thought the GOP should have let the appointment die on the vine because I knew this **** would happen when there was a Republican President.

Are you also against the nuclear option for this as well? The dems used both. The dems wouldn't let a Rep. bring up a nomination during the last year of a Rep. administration. They also used the nuclear option. Now they are getting both barrels. I have no problem with either. **** um.

 

[Steelworth]

The more I read about him, I hope it's Raymond Kethledge. In addition to him having an impeccable record of upholding/interpreting the Constitution, I mean how cool is this?

His paternal grandfather is Raymond W. Ketchledge, an engineer who invented an acoustically guided torpedo that was used to sink dozens of German U-boats during World War II.

This doesn't sound so bad either:

When Kethledge is in northern Michigan, he works in an office he created in a family barn near Lake Huron. The office has a wood stove for heat and a pine desk for a work space.

 

[madinsomniac]

It willbe Barrett so the Dems will have to align against a qualified woman appointee

 

[Spike]

Win-Win!



'It's a Terrible Vote': Red-State Democrats Face an Agonizing Supreme Court Choice

Democratic senators running for re-election in Trump Country face an agonizing choice over President Trump’s coming Supreme Court nominee: Vote to confirm the pick and risk demoralizing Democratic voters ahead of the midterm elections, or stick with the party and possibly sacrifice their own seats — and any chance at a Democratic majority in 2019.

The actions of a handful of Senate Democrats struggling to hold their seats in red states where Mr. Trump remains popular — notably Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Joe Manchin III of West Virginia — will have broad implications for the party at a critical political juncture.

A decision by one or all of them to try to bolster their standing with Republican-leaning voters in their states by backing the president’s nominee would undermine Democratic leaders as they try to sustain party unity. And if their votes put the president’s choice on the court, it could hasten the move to the left by the party’s aggressive activist core, while intensifying the clamor for new, more confrontational leadership.

But if they hold together on a “no” vote, those senators could not only surrender their own seats, but by expanding the Republican majority, they could also narrow the path of Democrats to a Senate majority for years to come by ceding those states to Republicans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/us/politics/democrats-supreme-court-nominee.html

 

[Spike]

Another Liberal SCOTUS Meltdown Is Coming...And It Could Be One For The Record Books

The first meltdown over the Supreme Court was epic. Justice Anthony Kennedy let the Trump White House know shortly after the official end of the 2017 term that he’s out by the end of July. He’s heading into retirement and creating a vacancy that gives conservatives the opportunity to have a solid majority on the Court.

Of course, the Left went into full meltdown mode. From liberal journalists to former Clinton officials and strategists, it was a mix of flipping off Justice Kennedy and warning red state Democrats not to cave on whoever President Trump pick unless they’re fine getting zero help from the national party.

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews even suggested that “vengeance”must be executed against this nominee, who will be revealed on July 9. Yeah, these people are still sour over Senate Republicans invoking the Biden rule over Merrick Garland’s failed nomination.

If the first meltdown over a SCOTUS retirement announcement was any taste of what's to come in this fight, just imagine when the Trump pick is finally revealed. It’ll be a character assassination like no other. The Democrat-media complex has already tried to smear the potential nominees that have been floated around, as have actual Democrats, and they’ve backfired magnificently.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattv...ing-and-it-could-be-one-for-the-reco-n2495476

---------------------------

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Are you also against the nuclear option for this as well?

No. The Dems made their bed, let 'em lay in it.

**** um.

Exactly.

 

[SteelChip]

Another Liberal SCOTUS Meltdown Is Coming...And It Could Be One For The Record Books

It's gonna be sooo much fun Spike....

Justice Anthony Kennedy retired, giving President Trump another pick. The court just upheld the president's travel ban and then they banned government union dues. Nowadays, a Democrat is pretty much down to wondering if there's a way to push up the date of the sun exploding.

Justice Anthony Kennedy retired last week, giving Trump another conservative Supreme Court pick. There's panic on the left. Democratic lawyers are scouring the law books to see if Ruth Bader Ginsburg would, by law, be required to step down from the Supreme Court in the event of her death

 

[IndySteel]

They are having sporadic preemptive assplosions already. The thunderous collective assplosion will be around 9:05 pm EST tonight. I hope he picks the woman. I can't wait...

 

[Ron Burgundy]

They are having sporadic preemptive assplosions already. The thunderous collective assplosion will be around 9:05 pm EST tonight. I hope he picks the woman. I can't wait...

Everybody knows you can't be a woman AND Conservative, or black AND conservative, etc. Some things are just not done.