Judge Scalia RIP

[pudly]

I hope they ship Merrick a free NRA patch or send him a donation letter for consolation. Seriously though, just because the NRA says no we have to automatically not consider him? They are a lobby. Or are we not allowed to go against the NRA hivemind? How about they not presume something about a nominee who hasn't been able to prove something on the bench because the opportunity hasn't presented itself yet? Let the senators ask the questions and make a decision based off the answer.

You are free to agree or disagree, but so far they have been spot on in their evaluations of Obama's previous Supreme Court appointments- Kagan and Sotomayor.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Ain't no way Obama is going to nominate a Constitutional originalist. It's just not going to happen...ever. This is all part of the ploy -- to appear to nominate "main stream" (neither "too conservative" or "too liberal") justices. Feel free to kid yourself, if you wish. I'll trust my gut on this one, sight unseen (so to speak) -- this guy will be the opposite of Justice Scalia.

Speaking of whether a judge is "too conservative" or "too liberal", we need a Justice that is "Constitutional". I don't want anymore left or right justices. Just those that believe the Constitution says what is says and means what it means the day its ink dried.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ain't no way Obama is going to nominate a Constitutional originalist. It's just not going to happen...ever. This is all part of the ploy -- to appear to nominate "main stream" (neither "too conservative" or "too liberal") justices. Feel free to kid yourself, if you wish. I'll trust my gut on this one, sight unseen (so to speak) -- this guy will be the opposite of Justice Scalia.

Speaking of whether a judge is "too conservative" or "too liberal", we need a Justice that is "Constitutional". I don't want anymore left or right justices. Just those that believe the Constitution says what is says and means what it means the day its ink dried.

Who in the Hell would want a Constitutional originalist?

Kut (thinks you chose the wrong word)

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ain't no way Obama is going to nominate a Constitutional originalist. It's just not going to happen...ever. This is all part of the ploy -- to appear to nominate "main stream" (neither "too conservative" or "too liberal") justices. Feel free to kid yourself, if you wish. I'll trust my gut on this one, sight unseen (so to speak) -- this guy will be the opposite of Justice Scalia.

Speaking of whether a judge is "too conservative" or "too liberal", we need a Justice that is "Constitutional". I don't want anymore left or right justices. Just those that believe the Constitution says what is says and means what it means the day its ink dried.

Who in the Hell would want a Constitutional originalist?

Kut (hopes you chose the wrong word)

 

[Dosproduction]

Anit gun he is a no go. I would also like to see someone who is a strict constitutionalist. Don't want a right or left wing nut I want someone who will uphold there oath of office and defend the constitution. This guy is not it. And the others are right as well if Hillary wins it might be a disaster. And if Trump wins it could also not be good for us Second Amendment folks.

 

[rhino]

We're doomed.

Not that I'm pessimistic or anything.

But we're doomed.

 

[MisterChester]

You are free to agree or disagree, but so far they have been spot on in their evaluations of Obama's previous Supreme Court appointments- Kagan and Sotomayor.

Thats because they've had proof they were that way. There's almost nothing on this guy in regards to the 2nd amendment. He simply voted that a gun case be heard in front of an entire panel. I don't know why, but he may have thought it had a better chance to preserve rights if he thought the other judges would see it that way. The chance of an old, white, moderate judge being anti-gun is plenty less than a woman or minority. I'm just saying give him a chance to explain himself instead of putting our heads up the NRA's butt without a question.

 

[Kutnupe14]

X

 

[MisterChester]

Ain't no way Obama is going to nominate a Constitutional originalist. It's just not going to happen...ever. This is all part of the ploy -- to appear to nominate "main stream" (neither "too conservative" or "too liberal") justices. Feel free to kid yourself, if you wish. I'll trust my gut on this one, sight unseen (so to speak) -- this guy will be the opposite of Justice Scalia.

Speaking of whether a judge is "too conservative" or "too liberal", we need a Justice that is "Constitutional". I don't want anymore left or right justices. Just those that believe the Constitution says what is says and means what it means the day its ink dried.

Ain't no way Trump or Hillary is going to do that either. Think of it this way.. If we do wait for the next president to nominate a judge, do you really want Trump or Hillary picking them? Merrick is the best possible choice to appease either side. I say we should consider getting him in before Hillary has a say! Obama could have picked anybody. But he went with the old white moderate. This is a steal for them... Stopped short of handing the keys to the conservatives IMO.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

A Supreme Court With Merrick Garland Would Be the Most Liberal in Decades

 

[Kutnupe14]

A Supreme Court With Merrick Garland Would Be the Most Liberal in Decades

It's ALREADY the most liberal in decades! Lol. And it's only going to get more liberal. So the question is do you want to take a small step with Garland, or an Olympic leap with Clinton's pick?

 

[El-Cigarro]

Hey Kut. Why don't you just go ahead and say you want the American Pubic, DISARMED!?! You sound like a good Liberal.....

 

[Lowe0]

Speaking of whether a judge is "too conservative" or "too liberal", we need a Justice that is "Constitutional". I don't want anymore left or right justices. Just those that believe the Constitution says what is says and means what it means the day its ink dried.

So, no more votes for women?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Hey Kut. Why don't you just go ahead and say you want the American Pubic, DISARMED!?! You sound like a good Liberal.....

I personally, don't want to deal with the American "pubic," and hope that govt stays out of our pants.

 

[El-Cigarro]

You and me too, Brother! Just don't be rootin' for the Left Side too much.....

 

[Kutnupe14]

You and me too, Brother! Just don't be rootin' for the Left Side too much.....

Im not rooting for the left side OR the right side. I, and some others, just think this place needs balance.

 

[jamil]

Are they in session after the election? They could always wait and confirm him then. And Obama could withdraw him, I suppose.

 

[jamil]

Im not rooting for the left side OR the right side. I, and some others, just think this place needs balance.

Not balance for the sake of balance.

 

[pudly]

Not balance for the sake of balance.

It doesn't need balance at all. The SC needs to follow the Constitution absolutely. Not left/right agendas. Not foreign laws. Simply apply the Constitution.

Whenever the SC is considering a controversial case with significant right/left arguments, the attention is always on how the "right" justices will find. They "left" justices are never in doubt and there is no discussion questioning if they will vote as a block to support the left's side. If you follow the Constitution, then cases will favor the right or left depending on the situation. If you are a partisan, there is no question which way you will decide. There was no serious questioning if the four leftists would find against both major 2A lawsuits (Heller & McDonald). The same is true in many other cases.

 

[jamil]

It doesn't need balance at all. The SC needs to follow the Constitution absolutely. Not left/right agendas. Not foreign laws. Simply apply the Constitution.

Yeah. It's not like we need a Clarance Thomas for every Wise Latina Woman. But that's how it turns out because the SCOTUS has too much power. Every administration wants to stack the court with it's own ideology. Even Scalia wasn't unbiased.