Flopper
Diamond Member
You seem to have a real hangup about men in women's showers, however you're certainly correct about a majority of Republicans would make it harder for Hillary to appoint a more liberal judge but who says she's going to appoint a more liberal judge. One thing to keep in mind is there are issues other than how liberal or conservative a nominee is. One being how hard it will be to get the nominee confirmed. Also, no president wants to nominate a judge who will be considered a political hack.Justices often surprise the presidents that appoint them. Earl Warren and William Brennan, the leading forces behind the aggressively liberal court of the 1960s were appointed by Eisenhower. David Souter, whom President George H.W. Bush expected to be a reliable conservative but quickly emerged as anything but that. For some justices, being appointed to the Supreme Court for life becomes an ideological liberator. They no longer need to build a record based on a particular ideology. They can put aside their prejudices and base their vote on their interpretation of the constitution, legal precedent, and the arguments presented. No Supreme Court judge wants to be seen by history and his peers as a reliable liberal or conservative.
I wouldn't be as worried if we have a GOP majority in the Senate. Hillary would be much less likely to appoint anyone pro men in women's showers if she knew he or she would be shot down time and again by the Senate.