SCOTUS-Watch: It's Gorsuch!

[KingSweden]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I guess she has no pro-choice record but her case history has very little to no abortion rulings meaning that we have no history to base her position off of. This is how conservatives got screwed on Souter

Based on what I know of her I imagine she's pretty pro life

Of all his short list I still think Gorsuch is the best choice, at least on non-abortion issues. He had a writing that spoke to me about how over-legislating is a negative

[KingSweden]

Probably not Diane Sykes. Her husband, Charlie Sykes, former conservative talk show host isn't fond of Trump. He should nominate a black or Latino conservative, and see the reaction of the Far Left.

Diane and Charlie Sykes are divorced.

[KingSweden]

Trump says he will announce his pick next week. The front-runner appears to be Gorsuch.

Gorsuch (from what I can tell) appears to be right of Kennedy but left of Roberts. Pro life but uncontroversial on other issues.

Honestly, *if* he's the pick, he's the one I was hoping for. Pryor and Sykes are both so out there getting a mainstream conservative like Gorsuch is a relief

I'm getting worried about Sykes pulling a Kennedy and supporting Roe if she is confirmed.  I hope he goes with Pryor, but it seems like Gorsuch is publicly pro-life as well.  I'm not quite sure about Hardiman.

It's been suggested Sykes is to the right of Pryor so I'm not sure where you're getting this idea from

[KingSweden]

If Trump really wants to please everyone, nominate Brian Sandoval who is pretty much a true centrist. How would anyone combat it? Obama leaked his name for nomination, he's GOP and I'm sure he has a world-view that he can understand everyone's issues. If Trump goes to the extreme, it's another campaign point against him. I don't think Trump would do that, he's really going to try to please everyone for the mere fact he really doesn't have the end-all be all stamp mark to make his policies true. It's why I think eventually his son-in-law Kushner will have his ear out of all the factions, because he operates in a more centrist fashion. Bannon is going to get dumped eventually, because he's too extreme and the American public doesn't want to hear his non-sense rhetoric, we just want to be successful.

Even Johnny Manziel knows that Trump has no reason to chase the haters.

I doubt he gets put on SCOTUS, but Sandoval back on the bench (perhaps the 9th Circuit?) would not surprise me. Apparently he'd like to be a judge again

[KingSweden]

In addition to those previous reports about Gorsuch, WashPost sources say Trump's top candidates are "William Pryor of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in Atlanta, Neil Gorsuch of the 10th Circuit in Denver, Thomas Hardiman of the 3rd Circuit in Philadelphia and Raymond Kethledge of the 6th Circuit in Cincinnati."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/trump-close-to-naming-nominee-for-supreme-court/2017/01/24/d47c75a0-e278-11e6-ba11-63c4b4fb5a63_story.html?hpid=hp_rhp-top-table-main_scotus815p%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.bcd08fccd82a

Anything big to know about Hardiman or Kethledge?

[KingSweden]

So after reading about Gorsuch I came across the "dormant commerce clause." How on earth is this a thing? Other states can sue a state claiming that a state law harms them? WTF??!?

That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Unless I understand this wrong...

[KingSweden]

So after reading about Gorsuch I came across the "dormant commerce clause." How on earth is this a thing? Other states can sue a state claiming that a state law harms them? WTF??!?

That is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Unless I understand this wrong...

This means Arizona can't limit the size of its fright trains.

The Commerce Clause makes perfect sense (and at this point is bedrock American jurisprudence). But a "dormant commerce clause" seems to bluntly fly in the face of the 10th Amendment

[KingSweden]

Gorsuch is right-wing nutjob and I'm not sure what would make anyone think otherwise.  If anything he'd shift the court to the right.

Are you implying that Gorsuch is to the right of Scalia?

Are you implying that's impossible or even difficult? Sure, Scalia was right wing on many things, but he consistently advocated a view touting the legislature's supremacy over the courts in the making of policy. While I don't know Gorsuch's views, there are plenty of right wing jurists who want the Court to take a much more activist role in advancing conservative policies than Scalia did. The Supreme Court emphatically does not operate on the exact same left-right axis that other branches do. A judge whose personal views are less right wing could have a view of the constitution that leads them to even more radical decisions.

Well put, though Gorsuch seems to take a limited view of executive authority, a good thing in a potential Trump administration. Being more like Scalia than Alito is a positive in my book.

Also think your point about SCOTUS justices not operating on same axis is good though misses point that a big thing is how broad or narrow a justice believes a ruling should be. More activist judges tend to aim for broad rulings

[KingSweden]

I'm hoping it'll be Gorsuch, but I have a hunch it'll be Hardiman.

If his sister is pushing him...

[KingSweden]

Saw an estimate on Twitter that Hardiman would be right of Kennedy and left of Roberts

I will laugh if after all the "but SCOTUS!" protests from the GOP this guy turns out to be Souter 2.0

[KingSweden]

The sense seems to be that Pence+Ryan+Priebus want Gorsuch, but Trump and his sister want Hardiman. After selling Trump on Gorsuch, Trump may have flipped to Hardiman and ended up with him for his final decision.

Never cross the family.

[KingSweden]

Saw an estimate on Twitter that Hardiman would be right of Kennedy and left of Roberts

I will laugh if after all the "but SCOTUS!" protests from the GOP this guy turns out to be Souter 2.0

My guess is, aside from law and order boilerplate crap, he's gonna be worse than Souter for the GOP.

And even there the one case cited seems mostly like a desire not to intrude on NJ's laws

[KingSweden]

According to FiveThirtyEight:

Yup, that's the graphic I saw earlier I was referencing

[KingSweden]

Tester on Gorsuch:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/647592?unlock=PSECX37NP7LBYGR7&mref=homepage-free

Good on him being realistic, though I'm sure NARAL will be just thrilled to hear this