One for sure, 3 more likely

C

Celticguy

New member
So possibly 4 new supreme court justices two of which are rubber stamp lefties. Not to wish him I'll but Thomas is getting old for a black guy as well.

This would make for a pretty big shift if DJT appoints constitutionists as he suggests he will there could be some matters come up of real consequence that could be settled properly. Won't be abortion, too hot a button, but gun rights, privacy rights, cross branch overreach etc.

So what would you like to see settled ?
 
Well, the conservatives all screamed that Scalia HAD to be replaced with a conservative, so I expect them to be consistent and replace Ginsberg w/ a liberal if it comes to that.

But it probably won't come to that. I'd bet she's still there when she's 90.

I'd also bet Trump goes Souter w/ some of his appointments. He's a libbie at heart.
 
Scalia wasn't a "constitutionist," his supposed Originalism was a scam, just read his majority opinion in the Holder case, he completely threw out the prefatory clause
 
Thing1 said:
Well, the conservatives all screamed that Scalia HAD to be replaced with a conservative, so I expect them to be consistent and replace Ginsberg w/ a liberal if it comes to that.

But it probably won't come to that. I'd bet she's still there when she's 90.

I'd also bet Trump goes Souter w/ some of his appointments. He's a libbie at heart.
Click to expand...

Do you seriously think the right wants Scalia's replacement to be a conservative is because Scalia was a conservative ?.....Seriously ?
By your flawed logic, the SC would forever be 4 to 5 in ideology....

The right always wants a SC justice to be a conservative, no matter who is being replaced.....and the left always a liberal lefty .....

who is being replaced is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT
 
NOVA said:
Do you seriously think the right wants Scalia's replacement to be a conservative is because Scalia was a conservative ?.....Seriously ?
By your flawed logic, the SC would forever be 4 to 5 in ideology....

The right always wants a SC justice to be a conservative, no matter who is being replaced.....and the left always a liberal lefty .....

who is being replaced is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT
Click to expand...

LOL

Guess you missed the discussion among conservative politicians, pundits and commentators after Scalia died.

You really have blinders on.
 
another textualist like Scalia

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-02-17/scalia-s-classic-textualism-will-be-his-legacy
Textualism is best understood as a reaction against the legal-process idea of focusing on statutory purpose. Scalia began with a harsh attack on the idea that legislative purpose can be identified.
It’s not only that legislative bodies are made up of many minds, as theorists of statutory interpretation had noticed since at least the 16th century. Scalia emphasized that a modern legislature reaches decisions by compromise and committee.
To attribute purpose as a historical matter is therefore almost absurd: When it comes to legislative intent, he insisted convincingly, there’s no there there.

With legislative intent ruled out, Scalia rejected the Aristotelian possibility of attributing rationality to the legislature and acting accordingly.
A judge who did so, he argued, was simply substituting his own judgment for the legislature’s. In a democracy, this move was particularly unjustifiable, because legislators are elected and subject to re-election while federal judges are appointed and serve for life.

That left Scalia with the challenge of saying how the law should in fact be interpreted. His answer was to rely on the text, and nothing but the text
 
Thing1 said:
LOL

Guess you missed the discussion among conservative politicians, pundits and commentators after Scalia died.

You really have blinders on.
Click to expand...

Really ?....then just point out what in my post you think is wrong.....I'll wait.

You must be claiming that these conservative politicians, pundits and commentators agree that if a liberal justices is being
replaced, then the replacement should be a liberal....thats absurd on its face and it defies logic.

Are you totally stupid ?
 
That reply makes no sense in relation to my comment, I never said conservatives weren't going to appoint a conservative, rather that the conservatives using Scalia because they think he was some kind of "constitutionalist" is an error, he was an overt partisan judge with nothing to do with legal ideology or how he interpreted the Constitution
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top