Kavanaugh is not an originalist, vote him down so Trump makes a better pick

[Cecilie1200]

This is a good choice. Trump will get at least one more in the next couple of years, Ginsburg could go any day, she cant even stay awake.

How in the world is the weakest, least-textualist candidate of the four a "good choice"?

that's a matter of opinion, and opinions are like assholes--------everybody has one. The senate will decide and in reality it will have zero affect on 99% of us

No, that's actually a fact supported by evidence.

Who sits on the Supreme Court SHOULD have little to no effect on 99% of us, but you and I both know that the Supreme Court has been corrupted to the point where their meddling affects the whole country.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Leftists have trouble multi-tasking. Too complicated to think about more than one thing at a time.

 

[Redfish]

This is a good choice. Trump will get at least one more in the next couple of years, Ginsburg could go any day, she cant even stay awake.

How in the world is the weakest, least-textualist candidate of the four a "good choice"?

that's a matter of opinion, and opinions are like assholes--------everybody has one. The senate will decide and in reality it will have zero affect on 99% of us

No, that's actually a fact supported by evidence.

Who sits on the Supreme Court SHOULD have little to no effect on 99% of us, but you and I both know that the Supreme Court has been corrupted to the point where their meddling affects the whole country.

you made my point by stating your OPINIONS on both issues. you think Cavanaugh was the worst choice--------that is an opinion, not a fact. you said the SC has been meddling, that is an opinion, not a fact. its not meddling just because you don't like some of their decisions.

 

[emilynghiem]

Why, yes. We don't live in 1789.

no we don't, but the words of the constitution apply today just as they did in 1789, those original words, coupled with over 200 years of precedents is how the SC should decide issues brought to it. Not on political whims, or "cultural changes" but the exact wording of the original document and precedents.

If you are arguing for case law and statute, sure.

I think that's what I said. But Ginsburg recently said that the constitution and law are merely guidelines that don't have to be followed to the letter. That kind of thinking will destroy this nation. But she wont be around much longer so its an academic discussion.

Confirmation of Kavanaugh is very likely.

So Ginsburg said that. You disagree. That's your right. You merely believe such thinking will destroy the nation, but you can't prove it.

Kavanaugh may get better than 65 votes.

Sil makes a weak "yabut whattabout" argument. It is what it is.

If the constitution is subject to "interpretation" then why not all laws? speeding for instance "but officer, I think the speed limit on this road is incorrect, so the court must dismiss my ticket"

They are, but must be agreed on by consensus.
So if people AGREE to follow a certain interpretation,
an AGREED process must be followed to CHANGE or apply that law in a different way.

The problem Redfish as shown by ACA
* the Constitutionalist conservatives uphold the belief or principle that a Constitutional Amendment
and representation by States would be required BEFORE "expanding the duties of govt to include health care tax policy"
* the liberal Democrats already believe in health care as a right as a default,
and no additional legislation was needed to pass a bill, only majority rule through Congress.
They already think it's IN the Constitutional laws under general welfare and equal protection of persons.

What we should have agreed upon is a process to implement the protection of health care.
Because we didn't, both sides interpreted the Constitution differently, the law was pushed through,
and is still disputed after the fact. Better to have agreed in advance, so the reforms could be
created BY CONSENSUS, but instead both sides are still fighting because we never
addressed the difference in interpretation because of the two different political beliefs.

 

[Manonthestreet]

I'm totally disappointed. I hope the Republicans vote him down and force Trump to make a better pick. Being an originalist is not pick and choose, sometimes you are, sometimes you're not.

Obamacare

Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Penned Healthcare Dissent Focused On Tax

I get that the penalty is a tax. But Obamacare is SO much more than a penalty. His logic, which the ape Roberts parroted, was the penalty itself was a tax, therefore the entire Obamacare plan was fine. It's the other way around. There is no possible way to get that healthcare exchanges and healthcare payments to insurance companies are taxes.

If there was a severability clause, he could have struck down all the legislation other than the penalty, but there wasn't. And regardless, he voted that since the penalty was Constitutional, the rest of the Unconstitutional provisions were Constitutional

Metadata

Kavanaugh: "The Fourth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures."

How is metadata about our phone calls not unreasonable with no warrant? They're specifically taking information from private businesses about our phone calls. You can justify anything with that logic. Get a warrant!

Trump’s Supreme Court nominee opposes net neutrality, supports NSA bulk collection

The SCOTUS's job is to vigilantly protect our rights. These are two clear cases that he clearly didn't. Is he going to be Souter II? He may be, he's not a vigilant defender of Constitutionally protected freedom

Perhaps that didn’t get fully appreciated until Dianne Feinstein’s sucker punch. However, one man certainly appreciated it — and he might make the difference in getting Kavanaugh over the top. Deep in a Washington Post article discussing the reactions to yesterday’s hearing, they report that Bush himself has been quietly lobbying those Republican senators that have grown disaffected with Trump: WaPo: Bush to the barricades for Kavanaugh

 

[Norman]

I'm totally disappointed. I hope the Republicans vote him down and force Trump to make a better pick. Being an originalist is not pick and choose, sometimes you are, sometimes you're not.

Obamacare

Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Penned Healthcare Dissent Focused On Tax

I get that the penalty is a tax. But Obamacare is SO much more than a penalty. His logic, which the ape Roberts parroted, was the penalty itself was a tax, therefore the entire Obamacare plan was fine. It's the other way around. There is no possible way to get that healthcare exchanges and healthcare payments to insurance companies are taxes.

If there was a severability clause, he could have struck down all the legislation other than the penalty, but there wasn't. And regardless, he voted that since the penalty was Constitutional, the rest of the Unconstitutional provisions were Constitutional

Metadata

Kavanaugh: "The Fourth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures."

How is metadata about our phone calls not unreasonable with no warrant? They're specifically taking information from private businesses about our phone calls. You can justify anything with that logic. Get a warrant!

Trump’s Supreme Court nominee opposes net neutrality, supports NSA bulk collection

The SCOTUS's job is to vigilantly protect our rights. These are two clear cases that he clearly didn't. Is he going to be Souter II? He may be, he's not a vigilant defender of Constitutionally protected freedom

And where are you going to find this unicorn of yours?

 

[JWBooth]

I'm totally disappointed. I hope the Republicans vote him down and force Trump to make a better pick. Being an originalist is not pick and choose, sometimes you are, sometimes you're not.

Obamacare

Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh Penned Healthcare Dissent Focused On Tax

I get that the penalty is a tax. But Obamacare is SO much more than a penalty. His logic, which the ape Roberts parroted, was the penalty itself was a tax, therefore the entire Obamacare plan was fine. It's the other way around. There is no possible way to get that healthcare exchanges and healthcare payments to insurance companies are taxes.

If there was a severability clause, he could have struck down all the legislation other than the penalty, but there wasn't. And regardless, he voted that since the penalty was Constitutional, the rest of the Unconstitutional provisions were Constitutional

Metadata

Kavanaugh: "The Fourth Amendment does not bar all searches and seizures. It bars only unreasonable searches and seizures."

How is metadata about our phone calls not unreasonable with no warrant? They're specifically taking information from private businesses about our phone calls. You can justify anything with that logic. Get a warrant!

Trump’s Supreme Court nominee opposes net neutrality, supports NSA bulk collection

The SCOTUS's job is to vigilantly protect our rights. These are two clear cases that he clearly didn't. Is he going to be Souter II? He may be, he's not a vigilant defender of Constitutionally protected freedom

Nailed it.