If Trump wins in 2024, will Aileen Cannon be on his Supreme Court shortlist?

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Pretty simple question. I think the answer is obviously yes.

Trump will express disappointment at the fact that his previous nominees such as Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch have not sided with him and protected his personal interests in 100% of all possible cases. Trump will criticize them for being insufficiently loyal to him, and will seek to nominate a new breed of much more hackish Judges who he can trust will preside over cases in the manner of Judge Roland Freisler.

Top among this new breed of judges will be Aileen Cannon, who is sure to be at the very top of Trump's Supreme Court shortlist. If there is any sort of opening in SCOTUS, he will absolutely nominate Cannon without hesitation.

And Republican Senators in the US Senate will also vote to confirm Cannon and any other such nominees.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Is there a conspiracy theory related to Trump that you guys don't believe? I remember when you all said he was going to appoint his late sister to the SCOTUS. Remember that debacle?

[emailking]

Is there a conspiracy theory related to Trump that you guys don't believe? I remember when you all said he was going to appoint his late sister to the SCOTUS. Remember that debacle?

I don't think anyone's alleging a conspiracy. Trump and Cannon are not likely in contact outside of his legal team. But she surely thinks it's a possibility and he may very well reward her for delaying the case.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Is there a conspiracy theory related to Trump that you guys don't believe? I remember when you all said he was going to appoint his late sister to the SCOTUS. Remember that debacle?

So what you are trying to say that you do NOT think Trump will consider Cannon for Supreme Court, and will be absolutely shocked-pikachu if he does? And if he does nominate her, you will urge Republican Senators to vote against her, and demand that he instead nominate another judge who is well qualified and can be trusted to fairly and neutrally apply the law?

[Ferguson97]

Is there a conspiracy theory related to Trump that you guys don't believe? I remember when you all said he was going to appoint his late sister to the SCOTUS. Remember that debacle?

So to be clear, your position is "no, she won't even be on the shortlist of there's a vacancy"?

[Vosem]

Yes. A young, qualified-on-paper, staunchly conservative Hispanic woman might well have been on the long list regardless, and probably the shortlist if something unfortunate happened to Sotomayor, but obviously the notoriety is going to help her a lot.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

Yeah, I'm expecting her to get an appellate seat as soon as it's open and go from there. Basically the same path as Coney Barrett.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

There aren't any vacancies, Breyer retired and Sotomeyer would retire now if she was afraid of zTrump would get reelected

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

There aren't any vacancies, Breyer retired and Sotomeyer would retire now if she was afraid of zTrump would get reelected

It's definitely time for Alito and Thomas to retire under a second Trump admin. But that wouldn't change the caucus of the court at all, because they're not only part of the conservative wing but the Trump loyalist wing.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Alito and Thomas aren't retiring unless they died

[Shaula🏳️‍⚧️]

Eh I still think Cruz is gonna jump to the court. He wants it, he'll be a loyal justice for Trump and a different Republican would probably perform better in a Senate race anyway.

[Vosem]

Eh I still think Cruz is gonna jump to the court. He wants it, he'll be a loyal justice for Trump and a different Republican would probably perform better in a Senate race anyway.

It has been reported that Trump offered Cruz the seat which ended up going to Gorsuch in 2017 and Cruz refused to be interested in spite of a multiple-month effort to lobby him from Bannon during the 2016-2017 transition. (IMHO this reflects very negatively on Cruz and shows him not to be a very serious person, but it is what it is). Cruz does not want SCOTUS and would not take it if offered.

[Ferguson97]

Eh I still think Cruz is gonna jump to the court. He wants it, he'll be a loyal justice for Trump and a different Republican would probably perform better in a Senate race anyway.

It has been reported that Trump offered Cruz the seat which ended up going to Gorsuch in 2017 and Cruz refused to be interested in spite of a multiple-month effort to lobby him from Bannon during the 2016-2017 transition. (IMHO this reflects very negatively on Cruz and shows him not to be a very serious person, but it is what it is). Cruz does not want SCOTUS and would not take it if offered.

I'm not sure why not wanting to be on the Supreme Court reflects negatively on him?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

[Progressive Pessimist]

She's been a sycophant for him, but not enough to where he'd reward her loyalty with a position on the highest court.

There aren't any vacancies, Breyer retired and Sotomeyer would retire now if she was afraid of zTrump would get reelected

It's definitely time for Alito and Thomas to retire under a second Trump admin. But that wouldn't change the caucus of the court at all, because they're not only part of the conservative wing but the Trump loyalist wing.

That would still be a disaster for the country since their seats would be occupied for generations perhaps, meaning the next retirement after them would likely be Roberts. And Democrats would still need to get lucky afterwards if he were to retire while they had the Senate.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

s Jackson, Kagan, Sotomeyer, cc Roberts, ACB, Kavanaugh, T Alito, Thomas and Gorsuch will be on the Crt for a Generation, but by 2032-36 I suspect Sotomeyer and Thomas be the next ones to retire that means a after the 2032 Eday

Trump or Biden won't get another pick that's why they went with 50.yr olds, I expect Alito and Gorsuch to be the last to retire

CJ Roberts already told them ACB and Kavanaugh not to invoke originalism on DC Statehood and Voting Rights Act because of threat of CRT packing I don't expect PR Statehood to survive a CRT challenge but who knows

[emailking]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

He might give it to her as a reward for being loyal but even if you think he wouldn't do that as a reward he might do it for no other reason than she's proven herself to be in his corner and to bend the rules just up to the breaking point to help him. He could use some people like that on SCOTUS if say, he wants to subvert democracy.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

He might give it to her as a reward for being loyal but even if you think he wouldn't do that as a reward he might do it for no other reason than she's proven herself to be in his corner and to bend the rules just up to the breaking point to help him. He could use some people like that on SCOTUS if say, he wants to subvert democracy.

You and I can see that she's done an effective job walking the line between pretending to be an honest judge and helping Trump delay his trial until after the election. But do you really think he sees it that way, or will see it that way if he gets back into power and the case is dropped and he can self-pardon?

Has the Donald Trump we've all given far too much attention to for the last eight-plus years ever demonstrated a realistic appreciation for nuance, or the ability to accurately frame the past in a realistic way? If he gets back into power, his likely attitude towards Cannon will be anger that she put him through all that, instead of just dismissing the charges and tossing the government's case.

Sure, if she'd done that out of the gate, the government would have appealed her decision and gotten the case back on track, likely with a more objective judge and more legal jeopardy for Trump. But even if Donald knows that, even if she helps put him over the top in November with a last-minute dismissal, he's not going to admit it after the fact. He's going to take out his fury at the years-long pain and humiliation of the charges, at Smith, the DoJ, and at Cannon.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

I think you are entirely correct that Trump would not consider her to reward her for her past loyalty to him over the law.

The reason why he would consider her, though, is because past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Not to reward her, but because he wants "his" judges to behave more like her and less like Kavanaugh/Gorsuch/Barrrett.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

I think you are entirely correct that Trump would not consider her to reward her for her past loyalty to him over the law.

The reason why he would consider her, though, is because past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Not to reward her, but because he wants "his" judges to behave more like her and less like Kavanaugh/Gorsuch/Barrrett.

There won't be a SCOTUS VACANCY  UNTIL2036 Thomas, Alito, Sotomeyer aren't retiring

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

It is notable that no blue avatars want to actually come out on the record against Cannon or other such hack judges.

The reason is because they suspect (and many probably hope) in their hearts that Trump will in fact try to put these sorts of people onto the Supreme Court, in order to undermine the rule of law and the Constitutional democratic order.

And they know that as soon as Cannon gets nominated, if Trump wins, they will need to rally behind her nomination.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

I think you are entirely correct that Trump would not consider her to reward her for her past loyalty to him over the law.

The reason why he would consider her, though, is because past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Not to reward her, but because he wants "his" judges to behave more like her and less like Kavanaugh/Gorsuch/Barrrett.

Sure, if Trump had more nuance than I think he's capable of. Objectively, she's a superb pick for a would-be dictator - loyal and willing to twist the law into a pretzel, but doing so effectively in ways that are arguably within norms. But I don't think Donald Trump is able or willing to make that fine distinction (and I'm skeptical that he ever was). He's going to see Cannon as the judge presiding over a trial that he found miserable and offensive, and those feelings will control his opinion of her. He always views the past through a lens of grievance and personal superority. If and when he escapes punishment for his document thefts, his opinion of Cannon will be that she could and should have ended the whole thing at any time, and instead put him through hell.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

LOL. All these years, and so many people don't understand Donald Trump even a little bit. Loyalty is a one-way street for Donald Trump. Why on Earth would he appoint her to the Supreme Court? If and when he's back in office, her value to him drops to zero. If anything, she'll end up with a metaphorical dagger in her back for not doing a better job of covering for him.

I suppose there's some small chance he'd appoint her just to anger his critics, but it seems unlikely.

I think you are entirely correct that Trump would not consider her to reward her for her past loyalty to him over the law.

The reason why he would consider her, though, is because past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. Not to reward her, but because he wants "his" judges to behave more like her and less like Kavanaugh/Gorsuch/Barrrett.

Sure, if Trump had more nuance than I think he's capable of. Objectively, she's a superb pick for a would-be dictator - loyal and willing to twist the law into a pretzel, but doing so effectively in ways that are arguably within norms. But I don't think Donald Trump is able or willing to make that fine distinction (and I'm skeptical that he ever was). He's going to see Cannon as the judge presiding over a trial that he found miserable and offensive, and those feelings will control his opinion of her. He always views the past through a lens of grievance and personal superority. If and when he escapes punishment for his document thefts, his opinion of Cannon will be that she could and should have ended the whole thing at any time, and instead put him through hell.

You know, You may actually be right here, because if there is anyone that can be that stupid, it is DEFINITELY Trump.

[Vosem]

Eh I still think Cruz is gonna jump to the court. He wants it, he'll be a loyal justice for Trump and a different Republican would probably perform better in a Senate race anyway.

It has been reported that Trump offered Cruz the seat which ended up going to Gorsuch in 2017 and Cruz refused to be interested in spite of a multiple-month effort to lobby him from Bannon during the 2016-2017 transition. (IMHO this reflects very negatively on Cruz and shows him not to be a very serious person, but it is what it is). Cruz does not want SCOTUS and would not take it if offered.

I'm not sure why not wanting to be on the Supreme Court reflects negatively on him?

Because, if you truly want to change the country, then a seat on the Supreme Court is a much better place to do it from than the US Senate. I could respect someone who believes themselves to be unqualified, but Ted Cruz, who was pretty clearly the greatest conservative Supreme Court litigator of the 2000s, is obviously qualified to be on the court, even if you disagree with his principles.

Not taking it meant he prefers being a demagogue, or prefers the (not great) chance of still becoming President one day, over an actual opportunity to change the country for (what he would see as) the better. It is an unserious move and it caused me to lose a great deal of respect for Cruz, even if I think Gorsuch was a fine choice.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Eh I still think Cruz is gonna jump to the court. He wants it, he'll be a loyal justice for Trump and a different Republican would probably perform better in a Senate race anyway.

It has been reported that Trump offered Cruz the seat which ended up going to Gorsuch in 2017 and Cruz refused to be interested in spite of a multiple-month effort to lobby him from Bannon during the 2016-2017 transition. (IMHO this reflects very negatively on Cruz and shows him not to be a very serious person, but it is what it is). Cruz does not want SCOTUS and would not take it if offered.

I'm not sure why not wanting to be on the Supreme Court reflects negatively on him?

Because, if you truly want to change the country, then a seat on the Supreme Court is a much better place to do it from than the US Senate. I could respect someone who believes themselves to be unqualified, but Ted Cruz, who was pretty clearly the greatest conservative Supreme Court litigator of the 2000s, is obviously qualified to be on the court, even if you disagree with his principles.

Not taking it meant he prefers being a demagogue, or prefers the (not great) chance of still becoming President one day, over an actual opportunity to change the country for (what he would see as) the better. It is an unserious move and it caused me to lose a great deal of respect for Cruz, even if I think Gorsuch was a fine choice.

He rules that Trump was a loser in 20 Eday that wasn't good for your side