February 16, 201610 yr Author I mention this to say that, despite the way a lot of folks view the court, it's turned pretty sharply away from the progressivism it was famous for during the Warren and Burger court eras. A lot of it hinges on one guy: David Souter. Assured as a home run for conservatism when recommended to George H.W. Bush, by the time he was four or five years on the bench, he was regularly voting with the liberals. Had Souter's conservative credentials held true, the Rhenquist court would almost certainly overturned Roe v. Wade in the Planned Parenthood v. Casey decision in 1992 and who know what other cases could have gone the other way. The story goes that Souter was preparing to go with Scalia and Rhenquist and overturn the previous decision and that a long conversation with Sandra Day O'Connor persuaded him to go the other way. It's interesting to think about. There's a conservatism inherent in the institution itself. Unelected, liftetime appointees essentially get to decide whether Congress has acted too boldly or not. With the rapidity of social change, a "moderate" justice could easily slide into the "conservative" role as years go by and with very little change on their part. And this is a somewhat strange juxtaposition to what has also been a Court noted for its progressivism. It has aptly restrained the "tyranny of the majority" to protect rights throughout its modern history (though in some instances it has carved out more and more exceptions to these rights over the years as well).
February 16, 201610 yr "Getslow's insiders look at the Supreme Court" is quickly overtaking "Getslow hates the people who run pro sports in the U.S."... I've got plenty of time. No reason we can't do both.
February 16, 201610 yr I think the Republicans are looking at this wrong. They are pinning their hopes on this on this fall and that is iffy. They control Congress and have a lame duck president. I think there is a good chance they can get a more favorable nominee now then they can next year at this time. A bird in the hand ... Very insightful. You are correct. Their best bet is to vote to confirm a moderate now rather than wait a year or longer and risk having less control in Congress and Hillary at the helm. Better confirm now. But they won't!
February 16, 201610 yr Can we all agree that stalling the SCROTUM nomination process is just going to make things hang in the air. I mean how long do they intend to keep us dangling before making a decision? Super smart AND funny! You never cease to impress me more and more.
February 16, 201610 yr Super smart AND funny! You never cease to impress me more and more. Thanks SF... you are my biggest "supporter". :thumb:
February 17, 201610 yr Every rumor is the president is going to nominate Loretta Lynch. That is the Republican moderate option ? With 9 months to go why would the GOP concede to someone who is anti 2nd ammendment ?
February 17, 201610 yr Author Every rumor is the president is going to nominate Loretta Lynch. That is the Republican moderate option ? With 9 months to go why would the GOP concede to someone who is anti 2nd ammendment ? I think Loretta Lynch would be the "this is going to be the election battle cry" option. Or the "this will make the real nominee seem more moderate by comparison" option.
February 17, 201610 yr I think Loretta Lynch would be the "this is going to be the election battle cry" option. Or the "this will make the real nominee seem more moderate by comparison" option. All I'm saying is if Obama's main nomination comes from his adminstration I don't want to hear cry's from the left. There is no way in 2007 the Democrat led Senate would of appointed the Bush AG.
February 17, 201610 yr Every rumor is the president is going to nominate Loretta Lynch. That is the Republican moderate option ? With 9 months to go why would the GOP concede to someone who is anti 2nd ammendment ? I've been following this story closely. I have yet to read one account that says Lynch is the favorite. She's on some top 10 lists, but so are nine other people. So when you say "every rumor," that sounds like you plucked this info apple from a single right-wing site. Read a story earlier in the evening that speculated the top three are Sri Srinivasan, Jane Kelly and Paul Watford.
February 17, 201610 yr I've been following this story closely. I have yet to read one account that says Lynch is the favorite. She's on some top 10 lists, but so are nine other people. So when you say "every rumor," that sounds like you plucked this info apple from a single right-wing site. Read a story earlier in the evening that speculated the top three are Sri Srinivasan, Jane Kelly and Paul Watford. SCOTUS Analyst: Loretta Lynch 'Most Likely Candidate' to Replace Scalia - NBC News Here's one crazy right wing site called NBC news
February 17, 201610 yr I've been following this story closely. I have yet to read one account that says Lynch is the favorite. She's on some top 10 lists, but so are nine other people. So when you say "every rumor," that sounds like you plucked this info apple from a single right-wing site. Read a story earlier in the evening that speculated the top three are Sri Srinivasan, Jane Kelly and Paul Watford. Scalia's replacement likely to be Loretta Lynch: Analyst Another crazy right wing site
February 17, 201610 yr Author ^FWIW both articles are citing Tom Goldstein from his article I linked earlier. I don't think he claims to have any inside scoop, but reasoned it out because he thought it would give Democrats an edge in the election.
February 17, 201610 yr SCOTUS Analyst: Loretta Lynch 'Most Likely Candidate' to Replace Scalia - NBC News Here's one crazy right wing site called NBC news Learn the difference between "every rumor" and "one rumor." These political boards are hard enough to comprehend without blatant exaggeration. An additional comment to your post #141: Where a possible Supreme Court candidate stands on the 2nd Amendment is way down my list. My prime concern is whether Scalia's replacement will give us more awful 5-4 decisions benefitting big business.
February 17, 201610 yr ^FWIW both articles are citing Tom Goldstein from his article I linked earlier. I don't think he claims to have any inside scoop, but reasoned it out because he thought it would give Democrats an edge in the election. Most news sources are quoting him. I was just proving a point I was getting this news from right wing sites.
February 17, 201610 yr Hmmm ... interesting. I can see the angle on Lynch. Just recently approved by Congress, including a vote for approval by McConnell. It would make it tough on those who voted for her to suddenly change their vote. I wonder how many Senators who voted for Lynch are up for re-election?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.