Wonder who Trump's 3rd Supreme Court Nominee will be?

[Mims44 1,867]

1 hour ago, TexasTiger said:

Most substantive post so far. Find an 8 year old to read it for you.

1 hour ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Woah woah woah ease up a little bit. Not everyone is like you Tex - I can’t just go “find an 8 year old.” 

 

I laughed more than I should have at this.

 

 

[triangletiger 1,599]

10 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Woah woah woah ease up a little bit. Not everyone is like you Tex - I can’t just go “find an 8 year old.” 

 

[japantiger 4,051]

9 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

They didn’t end for the SCt . McConnell did that— and would have done so any way.

So what's the lesson here Tex?  Hhhmmm, I get it, throw a tantrum everytime the other side uses the mess you created against you? 

I tend to think it is "don't use a weapon you don't want the other side using against you"....weapons are kind of that way....and tend to get out of hand once let out of the bag....maybe old Harry should have carried an olive branch and given on a couple of things and you guys wouldn't be dealing with this now...you know, like it had been done for 2 centuries...but hey, I digress.

  

[TexasTiger 12,829]

13 minutes ago, japantiger said:

So what's the lesson here Tex?  Hhhmmm, I get it, throw a tantrum everytime the other side uses the mess you created against you? 

I tend to think it is "don't use a weapon you don't want the other side using against you"....weapons are kind of that way....and tend to get out of hand once let out of the bag....maybe old Harry should have carried an olive branch and given on a couple of things and you guys wouldn't be dealing with this now...you know, like it had been done for 2 centuries...but hey, I digress.

  

It’s simpler than that. I just pointed out you were factually incorrect in your poop fling and you can’t handle being wrong.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Kavanaugh looks to be Kennedy 2.0.  We could have done better.

If he gets a third, my guess is it'll be Barrett, assuming RBG is the one to retire.  Replacing a woman with another woman will be good optics and offer one less obstacle during confirmation.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

17 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Kavanaugh looks to be Kennedy 2.0.  We could have done better.

If he gets a third, my guess is it'll be Barrett, assuming RBG is the one to retire.  Replacing a woman with another woman will be good optics and offer one less obstacle during confirmation.

I think Kavanaugh is a good pick. He was my favorite going into last night. What do you think he lacks?

Barrett is good too, but has been very political in the past. New Orleans girl. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

7 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

I think Kavanaugh is a good pick. He was my favorite going into last night. What do you think he lacks?

Barrett is good too, but has been very political in the past. New Orleans girl. 

I just think based on what I know of him politically, he reminds me more of the kinds of picks GOP presidents make, only to see them slide leftward once on the court.  I hope I'm wrong.  I think the best we may hope for is that he's slightly more conservative than Roberts, but less conservative than Alito.  But that's my best case.  I worry more that he'll end up about like Kennedy who was a wild card.  I don't think he's a Souter so it's not an awful pick.

I feel like it was a political pick and certainly not as solid from a conservative perspective as Gorsuch was, or Kethledge would have been.

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

21 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I just think based on what I know of him politically, he reminds me more of the kinds of picks GOP presidents make, only to see them slide leftward once on the court.  I hope I'm wrong.  I think the best we may hope for is that he's slightly more conservative than Roberts, but less conservative than Alito.  But that's my best case.  I worry more that he'll end up about like Kennedy who was a wild card.  I don't think he's a Souter so it's not an awful pick.

I feel like it was a political pick and certainly not as solid from a conservative perspective as Gorsuch was, or Kethledge would have been.

Have you had time to read some of his opinions?

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Have you had time to read some of his opinions?

Not a ton.  I know that on the case where the illegal immigrant was seeking an abortion to be provided by our government, he chose to write on a dissent different from the main dissent on the case, and his position on Roe was weaker than that stated by the other justices on the case.  His position on religious liberty is a bit mixed based on his opinion in Priests for Life v. HHS.  On the one hand, he affirmed the organizations right to not have their sincerely held religious beliefs abridged by government, but then in the same opinion seemed to affirm that the government has a compelling interest in facilitating access to contraception for employees in these kinds of organization.  That can open quite the Pandora's box.  And I do not care for his take that it would be constitutionally acceptable for a President to be exempted from prosecution or investigation while in office.

Beyond that, I haven't read much.

[AU64 10,122]

Still waiting on the higher level analysis and discussion.....TT has made an effort it appears.  

My only observation on the SCOTUS is that about every justice eventually moves a bit further left than when he or she is confirmed. ….maybe its the "ivory tower" effect where the justices are a bit removed from the place where the " rubber meets the road" …   Justices with liberal tendencies get even more so and some of the conservative justices give me the impression they are trying to get along with the others in their flock.  ...which means compromising on some principles if it appears the popular thing to do.  Roberts and his Obamacare decision still looks like a sell out to his fellow justices. 

[japantiger 4,051]

4 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

It’s simpler than that. I just pointed out you were factually incorrect in your poop fling and you can’t handle being wrong.

Constitutional officer's are constitutional officers Tex...both require advise and consent....sorry, but your distinction is without a relevant difference.

[japantiger 4,051]

2 hours ago, AU64 said:

Still waiting on the higher level analysis and discussion.....TT has made an effort it appears.  

My only observation on the SCOTUS is that about every justice eventually moves a bit further left than when he or she is confirmed. ….maybe its the "ivory tower" effect where the justices are a bit removed from the place where the " rubber meets the road" …   Justices with liberal tendencies get even more so and some of the conservative justices give me the impression they are trying to get along with the others in their flock.  ...which means compromising on some principles if it appears the popular thing to do.  Roberts and his Obamacare decision still looks like a sell out to his fellow justices. 

Maybe...but neither Thomas or Alito have; nor Scalia did....

[TexasTiger 12,829]

23 minutes ago, japantiger said:

Constitutional officer's are constitutional officers Tex...both require advise and consent....sorry, but your distinction is without a relevant difference.

Reid set one precedent, McConnel another. We are dealing with the latter. Facts are not relevant distinctions to you, I know.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Reid set one precedent, McConnel another. We are dealing with the latter. Facts are not relevant distinctions to you, I know.

I think you'd have to admit though, Reid's precedent greased the rails for McConnell's.  He effectively gave him political cover.

[TexasTiger 12,829]

35 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I think you'd have to admit though, Reid's precedent greased the rails for McConnell's.  He effectively gave him political cover.

Gave him cover, but in retrospect he should have done it sooner. McConnell was unprecedented in his judicial obstruction. He broke the system.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

5 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Gave him cover, but in retrospect he should have done it sooner. McConnell was unprecedented in his judicial obstruction. He broke the system.

Thank goodness.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Here's an interesting hypothetical:

It's March 2020 - 8 months from the 2020 Presidential election, and Ginsberg steps down due to health issues.  Does McConnell follow his precedent of "letting the people decide" on a president before confirming a SCOTUS judge in an election year?  If not, how does he wriggle out of it?

[TexasTiger 12,829]

2 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Here's an interesting hypothetical:

It's March 2020 - 8 months from the 2020 Presidential election, and Ginsberg steps down due to health issues.  Does McConnell follow his precedent of "letting the people decide" on a president before confirming a SCOTUS judge in an election year?  If not, how does he wriggle out of it?

He says it was the “Biden rule” in the first place and he’s no longer honoring Dem rules. He’s not bounded by honor or integrity so it will be easy.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

2 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

He says it was the “Biden rule” in the first place and he’s no longer honoring Dem rules.

Thank goodness for that.

[AU64 10,122]

4 hours ago, japantiger said:

Maybe...but neither Thomas or Alito have; nor Scalia did....

Somewhat the exceptions I think....

[AUFAN78 3,894]

Decent read on Brett Kavanaugh.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/07/09/donald-trump-supreme-court-pick-brett-kavanaugh/756956002/

[japantiger 4,051]

7 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Reid set one precedent, McConnel another. We are dealing with the latter. Facts are not relevant distinctions to you, I know.

Reid set the precedent on dropping the filibuster rule on superior constitutional officer advise and consent.  You just don't like it Tex that it got turned around on you guys.  Just like with the Presidential election...you're just a sore loser.  

[TexasTiger 12,829]

2 hours ago, japantiger said:

Reid set the precedent on dropping the filibuster rule on superior constitutional officer advise and consent.  You just don't like it Tex that it got turned around on you guys.  Just like with the Presidential election...you're just a sore loser.  

Can’t stand being wrong, can you? I haven’t even complained about the filibuster or lost any sleep over this nomination. I’m actually looking forward to the discussion his hearing will bring. May get uncomfortable for your cult leader, though.

[DKW 86 7,419]

On 7/9/2018 at 10:15 PM, japantiger said:

Tex, perhaps you should start a thread for a serious discussion on the merits of the pick...I'll jump in....but, from looking at the title of my post, it's pretty clear I had no intentions of engaging in serious discussion in this thread....it's just too fun...not quite as good as election nite...but pretty good.  When everything is the end of the world...well, just can't let that go....

 

Unfortunately this too true, AND FUNNY as hell. But it only applies to some Democrats, not all.

[homersapien 11,362]

11 hours ago, japantiger said:

Reid set the precedent on dropping the filibuster rule on superior constitutional officer advise and consent.  You just don't like it Tex that it got turned around on you guys.  Just like with the Presidential election...you're just a sore loser.  

And he did so because the Republicans were refusing to appoint any district court judges.  Pure obstructionism.