Replacing Ginsburg's Supreme Court Seat

[TcSoup]

What Coons is essentially doing, and you pointed this out, Dune, is impugning a constitutionalist who didn't legislate or activate laws which were not in existence.  HE APPLIED laws the congress had written.   Coons is so butt hurt as is Booker and the rest of those phonies that change is about to come to the supreme court for a long time.

Not if Trump is beat and the 2 Conservative Judges retire in the next few years who have more than hinted at it. 

Could easily and will switch back permanently with no return in sight in our shorten live time.

[zigbee]

What Coons is essentially doing, and you pointed this out, Dune, is impugning a constitutionalist who didn't legislate or activate laws which were not in existence.  HE APPLIED laws the congress had written.   Coons is so butt hurt as is Booker and the rest of those phonies that change is about to come to the supreme court for a long time.

Not if Trump is beat and the 2 Conservative Judges retire in the next few years who have more than hinted at it. 

Could easily and will switch back permanently with no return in sight in our shorten live time.

Sure, and a lot of things are possible.   Trump could win as well, Thomas and Alito retire and Trump make other appointments.   Stephen Breyer could retire as well and Trump get a second pick.  Clarence Thomas and Alito could hang on and when Biden or his accomplice Harris runs and is defeated is replaced by the next conservative president.  No one thought Trump would beat Clinton either.  Polls showed him losing.  EVERYONE I listened to had her winning....so we just have to wait and see.

[davebucknut]

Sure.  Gender fluidity and all

Fair enough.  She strikes me as the kind of person that doesn't take crap from anyone and would have no problem calling a spade a spade.  She also strikes me as an intelligent, deliberate, well-thought gentleman, who I would be happy to have as president over ANY of the current options from any party - 3rd parties included- even based on only a total of about an hour of seeing her speak and respond to Congress.

Then hopefully you'll call your senators and demand that she be put on the bench.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[davebucknut]

Over 120 Supreme Court decisions that were decided 5-4 that touch upon nearly every facet of American life — all at risk if Judge Barrett is confirmed, dramatically shifting the balance of the Court.

This is #WhatsAtStake. pic.twitter.com/tqjqNW3Ufm

— Senator Chris Coons (@ChrisCoons) October 14, 2020

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Amy Coney Barrett staked out on Wednesday her judicial independence -- even from her mentor -- during another day of intense questioning on Capitol Hill where she tried to assure senators she would be an impartial jurist who would weigh opposing views fairly.

President Trump's Supreme Court nominee already distanced herself from Trump's tweets on Tuesday -- arguing she would be nobody's "pawn." But on Wednesday, Barrett also distinguished herself from Justice Antonin Scalia, the late conservative icon for whom Barrett clerked.

AMY CONEY BARRETT FACES PRESSURE DURING HEARING, RESPONDS WITH GRACE AND POISE, EXPERTS SAY

Since Barrett admittedly prescribes to the same originalist judicial philosophy that Scalia championed, Democrats claim that Scalia's past votes against Obamacare, gay marriage and the Voting Rights Act would be hers too.

But under questioning from Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., Barrett told the senator it's unfair to expect she would decide a case just as her mentor had done.

"I hope that you aren't suggesting that I don't have my own mind," Barrett said, "or that I couldn't think independently or that I would just decide like, 'Let me see what Justice Scalia has said about this in the past.'

"I assure you I have my own mind."

Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett speaks during a confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via AP, Pool)
Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett speaks during a confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2020, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via AP, Pool)
Coons was making the case that adding Barrett to the court to fill the seat vacated by the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal icon, will have a "profound" impact to swing the court in the conservative direction with a 6-3 majority.

placeholder
DURBIN SAYS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION CASE AGAINST OBAMACARE IS 'ORANGE CLOUD' OVER BARRETT NOMINATION

Coons brought up a poster board of roughly 120 Supreme Court cases that were decided by a 5-4 majority where Ginsburg was in the majority and Scalia dissented.


Had Barrett been on the court instead of Ginsburg the difference in case outcomes would have had "huge consequences" on everyday Americans on issues ranging from health care to consumer protections and gun safety and immigration, Coons said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

"My core concern here, your honor, is that your confirmation may launch a new chapter of conservative judicial activism, unlike anything we've seen in decades," Coons said. "... And so with all due respect, I will be voting against your confirmation."

To liberals fairness is unfair.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Conanthelibrarian]

THe Senator is not wrong though. It would swing the court to its most conservative position in a long time. IM sure liberals are scared of the 5-4 decisions that would go against them in the future.

And of some of the old 5-4 decisions being overturned. As much as I hate abortion, if it ever got overturned, it would cause a huge social upheaval and there would be a ripple effect.

[ScarletHayes]

It wouldn't be overturned, it would be kicked back to the states.  The states would then decide.  And yes, if many deemed it illegal, social upheaval would result  --  murdering innocent children would finally stop. Well, it would no longer be legal in certain states. Murder is illegal and that happens, so yeah...

[zigbee]

Not sure which is worse, her clueless on basic facts about American life, her contempt for our intelligence, the White senators lack of concern about her cluelessness on race or White reporters failure to see why her answers are devastating. It's a festival of White Privilege.

— Jennifer 'Vote Early' Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) October 14, 2020

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

[jmesser1982]

Not sure which is worse, her clueless on basic facts about American life, her contempt for our intelligence, the White senators lack of concern about her cluelessness on race or White reporters failure to see why her answers are devastating. It's a festival of White Privilege.

— Jennifer 'Vote Early' Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) October 14, 2020

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

LOL! This is as funny as some people saying how dangerous this woman is. She single handed lay is going to destroy this nation.

i canâ€t remember which female senator said it but this was my favorite line. “Judge Barrett American women are afraid of you”. My wife went off upon hearing that.

[jmesser1982]

Not sure which is worse, her clueless on basic facts about American life, her contempt for our intelligence, the White senators lack of concern about her cluelessness on race or White reporters failure to see why her answers are devastating. It's a festival of White Privilege.

— Jennifer 'Vote Early' Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) October 14, 2020

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Another victim of WSDS. White supremacy derangement syndrome.

[K9Buck]

Loony libtards.

[davebucknut]

THe Senator is not wrong though. It would swing the court to its most conservative position in a long time. IM sure liberals are scared of the 5-4 decisions that would go against them in the future.

And of some of the old 5-4 decisions being overturned. As much as I hate abortion, if it ever got overturned, it would cause a huge social upheaval and there would be a ripple effect.

It has been nearly 100 years since the court has been as conservative as it would be with ACB replacing RGB.

Just imagine another term and refreshing Thomas' seat and/or another republican justice before 2025.

A 6-3 advantage in the courts for the next 30-40 years would be HUGE.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[dunefan]

THe Senator is not wrong though.  It would swing the court to its most conservative position in a long time.  IM sure liberals are scared of the 5-4 decisions that would go against them in the future. 

And of some of the old 5-4 decisions being overturned.  As much as I hate abortion, if it ever got overturned, it would cause a huge social upheaval and there would be a ripple effect.

It has been nearly 100 years since the court has been as conservative as it would be with ACB replacing RGB.

Just imagine another term and refreshing Thomas' seat and/or another republican justice before 2025.

A 6-3 advantage in the courts for the next 30-40 years would be HUGE.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

That is exactly what Coons was referring to yesterday.  All of those cases decided 5-4 with a left slanted court.  He's right to be concerned.  God I hope it happens.

[zigbee]

Utah Republican Sen. Mitt Romney said he will vote to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, after being the lone Republican to vote to convict President Trump during the impeachment hearings.


“After meeting with Judge Barrett and carefully reviewing her record and her testimony, I intend to vote in favor of her confirmation to the Supreme Court," Romney said in a statement released Thursday. "She is impressive, and her distinguished legal and academic credentials make it clear that she is exceptionally well qualified to serve as our next Supreme Court justice.”

He added: “I am confident that she will faithfully apply the law and our Constitution, impartially and regardless of policy preferences.”

MITT ROMNEY SAYS HE SUPPORTS MOVING FORWARD WITH TRUMP SUPREME COURT NOMINEE

Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, still maintains that she will not vote to confirm a nominee so close to the election, while Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Ak., has not revealed how she will vote.

Barrett's fourth and final day of interrogation from Senators concluded Thursday, with the Senate Judiciary Committee voting on her nomination on Oct. 22 and the full Senate likely voting the following week.

In September, Romney said he would vote for a nominee based on their qualifications, not based on the hearingâ€s proximity to the election.

“My decision regarding a Supreme Court nomination is not the result of a subjective test of ‘fairness†which, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder," Romney, R-Utah, said in a September statement. "It is based on the immutable fairness of following the law, which in this case is the Constitution and precedent. The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing partyâ€s nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own."


DEMOCRATS AVOID QUESTIONING BARRETT'S FAITH AFTER TAKING HEAT FOR 2017 HEARINGS

The senator continued: “The Constitution gives the President the power to nominate and the Senate the authority to provide advice and consent on Supreme Court nominees. Accordingly, I intend to follow the Constitution and precedent in considering the Presidentâ€s nominee. If the nominee reaches the Senate floor, I intend to vote based upon their qualifications.”

[dkeener67]

Mitt worried about his senate seat?

[ScarletHayes]

Mitt worried about his senate seat?

Elections tend to work wonders on certain people.  His little impeachment vote had him in hot water.  He votes down a Trump SCOTUS pick and it's game over for ole Mitt.  He burns any more bridges in Utah and he has no place left to go.