Forum Thread

Justice Kennedy announces his retirement from SCOTUS

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 1 - 15 of 75 1 2 3 4 5 Next
  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    His retirement is effective July 31st meaning that at the start of the next SCOTUS term in October we will only have 10 justices unless Trump and Republicans can ramrod through a replacement quickly.

    Expect another Gorsuch type with a promise to overturn Roe v Wade.

    Trump could hold off and make it an election issue to get even more evangelicals to vote in the midterm.

    Elections have consequences.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    This is devastating. The reverberations of his retirement and eventual far right wing replacement will be felt for decades to come.

    First up on the chopping block - women’s rights.

    I hope that protest vote still makes you Bernie or busters still feel like you really stuck it to “the man.”

    Thanks for ruining everything, including our country, guys. You really showed us!

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Congratulations America; I agree fully with Jared and Schmidt that this is an huge disaster; especially the timing of this.

    Like Matthews said the Dem's have to fight like hell and "pull an McConnell" on the new appointment, Which I doubt if anything can be done to stop the GOP. Thus the next nail in the coffin of Democracy. What an antique governing "system" here!

  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    This is an extract from a February 2016 interview with Trump:

    David Brody: “But beyond judges, do you believe Roe V. Wade was wrongly decided back in the day, back in 1973?”

    Donald Trump: ‘Well I do. It’s been very strongly decided but it can be changed. Things are put there and they’re passed but they can be unpassed with time but it’s going to take time because you have a lot of judges to go.”

    ==================================

    Well, not "a lot of judges"...just two. We are there now. The only question is will Trump try getting his nomination through the Senate quickly and perhaps risk losing someone like Susan Collins on the Roe v Wade question. Or will he make it an election issue to really pump up his evangelical base more. The thought of having Roe v Wade overturned will be compelling, either way.

    It has now become the number one issue for Republicans and should be for Democrats likewise. But maybe not all the Dems...

  • Independent
    Washington
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The way trump works\thinks he is likely abuse presidential power just to force the SC to make a ruling (take a side). It is sleazy way to by-pass Congress no matter what party has control.

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    This is an extract from a February 2016 interview with Trump:

    David Brody: “But beyond judges, do you believe Roe V. Wade was wrongly decided back in the day, back in 1973?”

    Donald Trump: ‘Well I do. It’s been very strongly decided but it can be changed. Things are put there and they’re passed but they can be unpassed with time but it’s going to take time because you have a lot of judges to go.”

    ==================================

    Well, not "a lot of judges"...just two. We are there now. The only question is will Trump try getting his nomination through the Senate quickly and perhaps risk losing someone like Susan Collins on the Roe v Wade question. Or will he make it an election issue to really pump up his evangelical base more. The thought of having Roe v Wade overturned will be compelling, either way.

    It has now become the number one issue for Republicans and should be for Democrats likewise. But maybe not all the Dems...

    Appointments for life are as nutty as anything in this country; let alone an Supreme Court which looks more like an old age home. I miss the "wigs" like in Britain. It is sure time to get another government structure; good examples enough in the world to copy even our neighbor ( Canada) has a better system.
  • Independent
    Washington
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote:

    Well, not "a lot of judges"...just two. We are there now. The only question is will Trump try getting his nomination through the Senate quickly and perhaps risk losing someone like Susan Collins on the Roe v Wade question. Or will he make it an election issue to really pump up his evangelical base more. The thought of having Roe v Wade overturned will be compelling, either way.

    Roe v Wade will be a hot topic during grilling of the SC nominee, but IMO, the issue has been settled and the SC wants it to stay that way. IMHO, to take away a right already granted to women is extremely high legal bar

    I do concede that trump is extremely dangerous as POTUS. He loves to blow things up. Imagine if he were to make "Roe v Wade" another campaign issue equal to immigration, and issuing an executive order that directly\institutionally violates Roe v Wade, thus forcing the SC handle the issue. It would be huge gamble in his part betting that that the majority on the SC already wants to over-turn Roe v Wade. I can easily see him abusing Presidential power in such a way that forces the SC to make political decisions.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    wwjd Wrote: Roe v Wade will be a hot topic during grilling of the SC nominee, but IMO, the issue has been settled and the SC wants it to stay that way. IMHO, to take away a right already granted to women is extremely high legal bar

    I just don't see it that way. Roe will very likely be in the dustbins of history in the next 12-16 months and Democrats would have no one to blame but ourselves.

    Overturning Roe will also affect women depending on the zip code they live in. Blue states will certainly quickly move to enshrine a woman's right to choose in their states constitution while red states will do the exact opposite. So whether a woman may live or die may soon depend on where she gets her mail delivered to.

  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    wwjd -- Yes Trump is the master at manipulation and will use this nomination in the way the benefits him the most. Mitch McConnell has already said he will force the approval this fall before the midterm election.

    Trump said he will select from his list of 25 that have already been vetted for the Gorsuch nomination. One of the experts on MSNBC has examined that list and said there are no moderates like Kennedy on the list. They are all Scalia/Gorsuch types.

    My even worst dream would be that Justice Ginsberg also is forced to retire before Trump leaves office. That will then be another Trump pick from the list of 25. Instead of 5-4 decisions for the next 25 years it will be 6-3 decisions.

    Banning all abortions to the pre Roe v Wade days is a high probability...unless Ivanka can talk some sense into her old man. Ha. Won't happen.

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Schmidt Wrote: Well, not "a lot of judges"...just two. We are there now. The only question is will Trump try getting his nomination through the Senate quickly and perhaps risk losing someone like Susan Collins on the Roe v Wade question. Or will he make it an election issue to really pump up his evangelical base more. The thought of having Roe v Wade overturned will be compelling, either way.

    It has now become the number one issue for Republicans and should be for Democrats likewise. But maybe not all the Dems...

    I'd be shocked if he waited because he'd be screwed if the Democrats somehow take over the Senate and refuse to take up any nomination. The Senate map is abysmal, but Donald is also historically unpopular, so anything can happen this November.

    My guess is that he will move now and dare Collins and Murkowski to go against him. He can afford to lose one of them and still have Pence be the tie breaking vote. Two other potential wild cards are Senators Flake and Corker. I wouldn't hold my breath expecting any of them voting down Donald's eventual nominee, but if they ever wanted to stand up to the President and show him who his boss actually is then now would be the time to do it.

    However, I am well aware that's very wishful thinking and fully expect both of them to get in line.

    This is a crisis of our own making and we Democrats must own up to it. We sat out the 2014 elections and we allowed a bunch of angry Bernie or busters to overrule the will of the majority of Americans in 2016, so if we get angry with anyone, we should look in the mirror.

  • Independent
    Washington
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    The only way i see Roe v Wade being overturned is if there is currently a majority of SCJ that already believe Roe v Wade was a bad decision and they have been wanting to over turn it their entire career. Otherwise, I think they will uphold lower court rulings rather than keep rehashing something that has been decided.

    .... The one exception is, as I stated above, trump does something through abuse of power that forces the SC to get involved. And if they do, I think it still comes down to if they think Roe v Wade was a bad decision, and are simply waiting for something to that allows Roe v Wade to be overturned.

    We know trump, and he is willing to abuse presidential powers, taking the gamble that the SC will stand down to him as president. And I think he wants to find out how much power\control\influence he has over the SC. In his mind, he likely believes he can control the SC using the same tactics he uses on everyone else.

  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Even if we can get a couple of Republicans to block the nomination, there are three or four Dems that could vote for the nominee, much like they voted for Gorsuch.

    Trump is talking like he wants a very young one that will be on the court for 40 - 45 years.

  • Independent
    Washington
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    someone like stephen miller, or one of his sons. He won't do that, but that would be his ideal.

    Trump: "Where does it say they have to have a legal degree?"

    supremecourt.gov/about/faq_general.aspx

    The basic assumption is that the vetting process will flush out unqualified individuals.

  • Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Colorado Springs, CO
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    Roe v Wade History

    It is unclear to me what would happen if Roe v Wade was challenged in the Supreme Court. Prior to 7-2 ruling in 1973, abortion was allowed in a few states (Hawaii, New York, Alaska and Washington). Would it revert to states rights to legislate or would the court legislate from the bench and unilaterally ban abortion in all trimesters for all America? In effect the court would have to rule that the 14th Amendment does NOT apply. It would be a major setback for women declaring that abortion is not a right granted under the 14th amendment.

    What is playing out here is the power of the religious right to dictate government policy. In looking at the above history of Roe v Wade I find it interesting that the decisions to ban abortion in the past seem to be driven more by political motivations than by Biblical edict. From the above link:

    "In the late 1850s, the newly established American Medical Association began calling for the criminalization of abortion, partly in an effort to eliminate doctors’ competitors such as midwives and homeopaths.

    "Additionally, some nativists, alarmed by the country’s growing population of immigrants, were anti-abortion because they feared declining birth rates among white, American-born, Protestant women.

    "In 1869, the Catholic Church banned abortion at any stage of pregnancy, while in 1873, Congress passed the Comstock law, which made it illegal to distribute contraceptives and abortion-inducing drugs through the U.S. mail. By the 1880s, abortion was outlawed across most of the country."

    Likewise as the Huffington Post reports, no where in the Bible can anyone find a decree that specifically addresses abortion and for good reason. "Biblical writers don’t talk about sperm fertilizing eggs. They talk about male “seed” planted in fertile female ground. "

    My opinion is that it is more to so with nativist (e.g. white American protestant, Catholics, Mormons, etc.) worrying about the declining number of adherents to their respective faiths if abortion is practiced in a big way. Not only is abortion banned within their respective churches but they are also encouraged to have large families (usually four or more) so that they can grow their religion from within as well as converting others to their beliefs.

    In any case, Trump has made it a political football now to pander to the religious right for votes. I doubt whether he understands or gives a shit about abortion per se but he can count votes.

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    No one talks about the "timing" of all of this. Why now? the guy could have waited about 4 month to announce this; he was not sick or anything else, except as he stated wanted to enjoy his grand children; that could have waited. Thus Trump and his cronies must have done something to persuade the guy to do it now. Smells again like a dead rat!!

    Again something for the FBI and Mueller to investigate. That is what you get if you invite the "devil" to run the country. Also he's hiring an other ex FOX news guy into the "clan".

    As I've predicted before "step by step" Trump gets its way to "dictatorship" every day a little step in that direction with lots of "promised loyalty"