What will last of Trump?

[Dill]

(07-19-2018, 11:22 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I agree 100% on Garland, and would be perfectly fine with the Dems replying in kind if they take the Senate.  From what I understand they have a shot at holding this up through the seating of a new Senate.  

I haven't paid a whole lot of attention, but are there specific things that would make you think Kavanaugh is not qualified?  I imagine there are plenty of things you would disagree with, but that's a different discussion.  Let's remember that NOW said Souter would end women's rights, the NAACP started a letter writing campaign against him, and Kennedy and Kerry voted against him, likening him to Bork.

Funny you should mention Souter. That pick has intensified the vetting process like no single even int the past 100 years. Neither side wants a repeat.

And remember, I am saying a nomination to the Supreme Court is about more than just "qualification." There is a matter of balance on the courts. If the Federalist Society has provided Trump a list of "approved" candidates, that suggests to me he will not consider R v Wade settled law. It means that when future Citizen's United type cases come before the court, he will secure the moneyed interest.

In previous generations, balance among the parties insured that successful nominees could not be too far out of the mainstream. That check appears to be gone now.