A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

A judge that follows the Constitution and doesn't think they have the authority to rewrite legislation, isn't a conservative, they'd just be a good judge. That's all I want.

100% agree.

I have renewed faith in our system and the people within it when I watch judges make difficult decisions based on the law and the plain language of the constitution (even if I don't agree with the rulings). I would pick a super leftist if I know for certain that the goose-stepper would interpret the constitution and laws in the same fashion all other courts are charged. Courts should provide us with certainty.

If the constitution can be interpreted to mean anything, it means nothing.

I wish the clowns wanting to force their agenda valued that certainty.

 

[candycorn]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

No.

Trump should nominate someone
The Senate should hold hearings and the full body should vote if she/he makes it out of committee.
That is the system.
Stop tinkering with the rules, the customs etc…

Or better yet, write down some damn rules and codify them into the system so 20 years from now when we have another vacancy, whatever douchewaffle who runs the joint can’t just make up their own rules.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

There are legitimate reasons why Trump should not be allowed to pick a supreme court justice.

A Better Reason to Delay Kennedy’s Replacement

By Paul Schiff Berman

Mr. Berman is a professor at George Washington University Law School.

Almost immediately after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement on Wednesday, Senate Democrats argued that his replacement should not be confirmed until after the midterm elections this fall — a version of the same argument that Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, used to stymie President Barack Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court in 2016.

This is surely a valid argument, not least because Mr. McConnell’s blatantly anti-democratic ploy stole a judicial appointment from a popularly elected president and gave it to one who lost the popular vote by millions.

But there is another reason to withhold confirmation that both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree on: People under the cloud of investigation do not get to pick the judges who may preside over their cases. By this logic, President Trump should not be permitted to appoint a new Supreme Court justice until after the special counsel investigation is over, and we know for sure whether there is evidence of wrongdoing.

True, that point is unlikely to stop Mr. McConnell or his colleagues. But it highlights the real risk involved in letting a deeply compromised president shape a court that may one day stand between him and impeachment.

www.nytimes.com/2018/06/29/opinion/a-better-reason-to-delay-kennedys-replacement.html

Trump is POTUS, nobody can legally stop him from a SCOTUS pick.

 

[OKTexas]

A judge that follows the Constitution and doesn't think they have the authority to rewrite legislation, isn't a conservative, they'd just be a good judge. That's all I want.

100% agree.

I have renewed faith in our system and the people within it when I watch judges make difficult decisions based on the law and the plain language of the constitution (even if I don't agree with the rulings). I would pick a super leftist if I know for certain that the goose-stepper would interpret the constitution and laws in the same fashion all other courts are charged. Courts should provide us with certainty.

If the constitution can be interpreted to mean anything, it means nothing.

I wish the clowns wanting to force their agenda valued that certainty.

If judges applied the same standards to every case, unanimous decisions would be the rule instead of the exception. There's no variation when proper standards are applied.


.

 

[karpenter]

I would be surprised if the GOP picked up anything less than 5 senate seats..

Kennedy Probably Thinks The Same Thing...