Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Justice Kennedy Retiring
#1
Just saw SCOTUS Blog tweet that effective 31 July, Kennedy is retiring.

Brett Kavanaugh's name has been rumored to be floated by Senate Republicans as a replacement.

Edit to add: Kennedy is a more right-wing Justice, though he has been a swing vote on some heavy hitting 5-4 decisions. Kavanaugh took three years to get through the process for his lower court appointment because of concerns over partisanship and it took a lot of wheeling and dealing to get him there. If he is nominated I would expect a filibuster.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
#2
I'm sure the timing is political, but 30 years is plenty long to be a justice.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#3
(06-27-2018, 03:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm sure the timing is political, but 30 years is plenty long to be a justice.

Definitely. I don't begrudge him retirement. If Congress wasn't such a cluster I'd be absolutely fine, even with a Republican majority in the Senate. Long ago, in the days when there were established norms that actually guided things, the Senate could usually set aside the bickering and discuss reasonable jurors that would keep a decent balance on the court. I don't see that happening in this environment, but I don't think Kennedy should stay on the court just because Congress is filled with partisan morons.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR

"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
#4
[Image: 071215_judgejeanine.jpg?itok=9VgkrTmg]
[Image: giphy.gif]
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
#5
Will we have to wait until after the November elections to have hearings on a potential replacement?

Many people say that is the way it is supposed to work.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
#6
(06-27-2018, 03:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: [Image: 071215_judgejeanine.jpg?itok=9VgkrTmg]

Oh jebus...about ten minutes after I posted the above:

[Image: giphy.gif]
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
#7
(06-27-2018, 04:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Will we have to wait until after the November elections to have hearings on a potential replacement?

Many people say that is the way it is supposed to work.

If they hurry to appoint one it'll be a sign they don't think Trump can win a second term. 
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#8
(06-27-2018, 04:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If they hurry to appoint one it'll be a sign they don't think Trump can win a second term. 

Or that they will lose the Senate.  
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#9
(06-27-2018, 04:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If they hurry to appoint one it'll be a sign they don't think Trump can win a second term. 

(06-27-2018, 04:33 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Or that they will lose the Senate.  

Or they are just giant hypocrites that stole a SCOTUS seat purely for political purposes.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
#10
(06-27-2018, 04:36 PM)GMDino Wrote: Or they are just giant hypocrites that stole a SCOTUS seat purely for political purposes.

While I agree that what they did was unethical, I don't know how that relates to this.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#11
(06-27-2018, 03:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Definitely. I don't begrudge him retirement. If Congress wasn't such a cluster I'd be absolutely fine, even with a Republican majority in the Senate. Long ago, in the days when there were established norms that actually guided things, the Senate could usually set aside the bickering and discuss reasonable jurors that would keep a decent balance on the court. I don't see that happening in this environment, but I don't think Kennedy should stay on the court just because Congress is filled with partisan morons.

Eh. IMO, the absolute worst thing that can happen to partisan morons is for them to get everything they want. So busy smearing the other side that they forget they have to live in the world they create for themselves.
[Image: 416686247_404249095282684_84217049823664...e=659A7198]
#12
(06-27-2018, 04:25 PM)GMDino Wrote: Oh jebus...about ten minutes after I posted the above:


I don't think Republicans would accept someone nominated whose judicial experience was being a county judge for 2 years almost 3 decades ago 
[Image: ulVdgX6.jpg]

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#13
(06-27-2018, 05:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't think Republicans would accept someone nominated whose judicial experience was being a county judge for 2 years almost 3 decades ago 

But I could see him nominating someone like that.  Hopefully a grown up is involved.  
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#14
(06-27-2018, 04:37 PM)michaelsean Wrote: While I agree that what they did was unethical, I don't know how that relates to this.

Then I can't help you anymore.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
#15
(06-27-2018, 05:00 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I don't think Republicans would accept someone nominated whose judicial experience was being a county judge for 2 years almost 3 decades ago 

The accepted a POTUS with no military or political experience....
[Image: giphy.gif]
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
#16
Right. They accepted a Reality Show host for the highest office in the land for crying out loud.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]

Quote:"Success doesn’t mean every single move they make is good" ~ Anonymous 
"Let not the dumb have to educate" ~ jj22
#17
I fear Trump will nominate some far right person because he thinks that's what his base wants.

What happens if RBG retires or dies in the next year? That's my fear!
#18
(06-27-2018, 03:18 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I'm sure the timing is political, but 30 years is plenty long to be a justice.

Is there anyone that is opposed to term limits for Supreme Court Justices (or senators or representatives)?
[Image: giphy.gif]
#19
(06-27-2018, 05:41 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Is there anyone that is opposed to term limits for Supreme Court Justices (or senators or representatives)?

I think 20 years would be a fair limit.
“History teaches that grave threats to liberty often come in times of urgency, when constitutional rights seem too extravagant to endure.”-Thurgood Marshall

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
#20
#winning
[Image: bfine-guns2.png]

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]





Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)