Future SCOTUS

[JSojourner]

Given that I have gone from 65% sure to 80% sure of a McCain-Palin victory in the fall, it is almost a foregone conclusion that at least one, and possibly as many as three, SCOTUS justices will be replaced in the next four or eight years.

Questions:

1.    Do you believe John McCain when he says he will appoint justices like Scalia, Thomas and Alito?  Or do you think he was saying that because he wants the fundagelical vote, and really intends to strike a more centrist ground?

2.    If something should happen to President McCain (God forbid), then what kind of SCOTUS justices do you believe a President Palin would nominate? How do you feel about that?

3.    Do you believe Democratic Senators, if they have a strong majority, will grow a spine?  Or, continuing to cower in fear at the prospect of being labelled "liberal America haters", do you believe they will continue to bend over forwards for Republicans?

[Kaine for Senate '18]

For the record, I don't think McCain will win, but since you asked:

1.  No, I don't think he will.  I think he'd appoint people like Kennedy, O'Connor, or what Stevens was supposed to be.  Moderate conservatives with experience.

2.  Palin would appoint lunatics, people to the right of Bork, but without the positives of Scalia (flag burning).  I'd probably leave the country, at least for a while.  However, no Bork's are getting through 57-58 Democrats.

3.  It depends.  If McCain tries to appoint a Bork or Thomas, they ain't getting through.  If he appoints a Roberts, Kennedy, or Scalia type, someone who isn't extreme, and has experience, they may get through.  It also depends on how popular Mac is at the time.  If he's below 45%, he'll face opposition on anyone to the right of Kennedy.  If he's in the high 50'5/60's, than he could easily get all but the most extreme people through.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

1. Crazies
2. Crazies
3. No

[Torie]

Given that I have gone from 65% sure to 80% sure of a McCain-Palin victory in the fall, it is almost a foregone conclusion that at least one, and possibly as many as three, SCOTUS justices will be replaced in the next four or eight years.

Questions:

1.    Do you believe John McCain when he says he will appoint justices like Scalia, Thomas and Alito?  Or do you think he was saying that because he wants the fundagelical vote, and really intends to strike a more centrist ground?

2.    If something should happen to President McCain (God forbid), then what kind of SCOTUS justices do you believe a President Palin would nominate? How do you feel about that?

3.    Do you believe Democratic Senators, if they have a strong majority, will grow a spine?  Or, continuing to cower in fear at the prospect of being labelled "liberal America haters", do you believe they will continue to bend over forwards for Republicans?

The Dem Senator will filibuster if need be an Alito or Roberts type nominee. It will be war, and it will stick. McCain will probably go for that type, and then pick a moderate, after the first nominee bites the dust. Interestingly, the two moderates of note in recent times, O'Connor and Kennedy, I don't consider distinguished jurists. Maybe moderateness is a function of incoherence or something. Palin will go down the same road as McCain. It is the only road in town.

I still think Obama is the favorite to win the presidency by the way. I don't think Palin helps McCain. Why?  Because she is presumptively not qualified to be president. Maybe she can dispell that in time.

[หมูเด้ง]

Given that I have gone from 65% sure to 80% sure of a McCain-Palin victory in the fall, it is almost a foregone conclusion that at least one, and possibly as many as three, SCOTUS justices will be replaced in the next four or eight years.

Questions:

1.    Do you believe John McCain when he says he will appoint justices like Scalia, Thomas and Alito?  Or do you think he was saying that because he wants the fundagelical vote, and really intends to strike a more centrist ground?

2.    If something should happen to President McCain (God forbid), then what kind of SCOTUS justices do you believe a President Palin would nominate? How do you feel about that?

3.    Do you believe Democratic Senators, if they have a strong majority, will grow a spine?  Or, continuing to cower in fear at the prospect of being labelled "liberal America haters", do you believe they will continue to bend over forwards for Republicans?

The Dem Senator will filibuster if need be an Alito or Roberts type nominee. It will be war, and it will stick. McCain will probably go for that type, and then pick a moderate, after the first nominee bits the dust. Interestingly, the two moderates of note in recent times, O'Connor and Kennedy, I don't consider distinguished jurists. Maybe moderateness is a function of incoherence or something. Palin will go down the same road as McCain. It is the only road in town.

I still think Obama is the favorite to win the presidency by the way. I don't think Palin helps McCain. Why?  Because she is presumptively not qualified to be president. Maybe she can dispell that in time.

...and remember, the democrats won't even need to filibuster.....they will simply drill into the nominee and if the nominee gives bad answers or avoids talking, they will simply not vote for that nominee to be voted on.

[Torie]

No, the tradition of sending nominees for SCOTUS down to the floor for a vote is pretty ingrained.  They are not stopped up in the Judiciary Committee.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

No, the tradition of sending nominees for SCOTUS down to the floor for a vote is pretty ingrained.  They are not stopped up in the Judiciary Committee.

However, they could send him to the floor with the recommendation that he not be confirmed.

[DownWithTheLeft]

I think McCain would appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, solid conservatives.  Person that comes to mind is Michael Luttig.  If Palin is president, there is really only person I expect her to look at.  She use are momentous occasion as first woman president to appoint another female, a libertarian conservative, Janice Rogers Brown.

[หมูเด้ง]

I think McCain would appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, solid conservatives.  Person that comes to mind is Michael Luttig.  If Palin is president, there is really only person I expect her to look at.  She use are momentous occasion as first woman president to appoint another female, a libertarian conservative, Janice Rogers Brown.

Luttig could be confirmed. He would affirm Roe, but would be right-wing. Think Neo-con. I actually expect Luttig to be nominated and confirmed, if McCain wins. Possner would be interesting, too. The entire "baby market" thing and they fact that he supports SOME abortion rights would turn off the whitetrash that will get him elected.

Janice Rogers Brown? I could see her. She not a libertarian conservative, she is a reactionary. I could also see Wilkinson.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Brown won't get confirmed.  If it took a compromise to get her a vote for a Circuit Court, don't expect any vote at all for the SCOTUS.  If there is a vote, she loses big.

[Torie]

No, the tradition of sending nominees for SCOTUS down to the floor for a vote is pretty ingrained.  They are not stopped up in the Judiciary Committee.

However, they could send him to the floor with the recommendation that he not be confirmed.

Sure, all I am saying, is that the Dems will resort to filibuster if need be to stop another reliable vote to cause the quartet to expand to a quintet. The gloves will be off. And Luttig is out, Brown totally out (she is a freaking veritable social Darwinist), and Posner is iffy, but he is old enough (69 now), and his right wing cred perhaps sufficiently limited to certain economic issues, that maybe he could pass muster. If he were closer to 55 years of age, no way.

[JSojourner]

No, the tradition of sending nominees for SCOTUS down to the floor for a vote is pretty ingrained.  They are not stopped up in the Judiciary Committee.

However, they could send him to the floor with the recommendation that he not be confirmed.

Sure, all I am saying, is that the Dems will resort to filibuster if need be to stop another reliable vote to cause the quartet to expand to a quintet. The gloves will be off. And Luttig is out, Brown totally out (she is a freaking veritable social Darwinist), and Posner is iffy, but he is old enough (69 now), and his right wing cred perhaps sufficiently limited to certain economic issues, that maybe he could pass muster. If he were closer to 55 years of age, no way.

I was hoping your would weigh in on this Torie, because I respect your judgment with regard to our legal system.  I think you're right -- at least, I am hoping Democrats would have enough spine to oppose another conservative judicial activist.  I prefer liberal judicial activists.  LOL

I actually like Roberts a lot personally. And I agree, he is very bright.

[Kaine for Senate '18]

Luttig and Brown are certainly not going to get confirmed, and I think Posner is just too old to merit consideration anymore.

On a side note, I met Posner once when my dad argued in front of him, and he's a nice guy.

[หมูเด้ง]

I would be comfortable with Luttig or Possner. Fu ck Brown though. That woman is a back throw to the eugenics movement.

[opebo]

I agree that McCain has an 80% chance of winning..

1.    Do you believe John McCain when he says he will appoint justices like Scalia, Thomas and Alito?  Yes, I do. Or do you think he was saying that because he wants the fundagelical vote, and really intends to strike a more centrist ground?  No, I don't

2.    If something should happen to President McCain (God forbid), then what kind of SCOTUS justices do you believe a President Palin would nominate? How do you feel about that?  Basically the same kind McCain would, possibly just slightly worse.  How do I feel about all this - I'm sure you can imagine. 

3.    Do you believe Democratic Senators, if they have a strong majority, will grow a spine?  Or, continuing to cower in fear at the prospect of being labelled "liberal America haters", do you believe they will continue to bend over forwards for Republicans?  They will approve anyone appointed by either McCain or the religious, unless some kind of scandal prevents it, like with Bork, though even then it is likely (as with the token 'black' judge).

[opebo]

...Brown totally out (she is a freaking veritable social Darwinist)

Um.. you support social Darwinism, Torie, as does your party, as do a huge portion of the electorate including many Democrats.  This aspect of the vile Brown does not preclude her attaining power.

Really I think it hilarious how you non-social-conservatives who vote GOP because you (erroneously) believe they're better for your bottom line always have this fall back argument that the Democrats you despise will save us from the theocracy you vote for every election.

[Torie]

Er, I don't think we need Democrats to "save" us from a theocracy, Opebo. Where on earth did you get that impression of my leitmotif?

I don't support social Darwinism either.  Heck, I am in favor of old age pensions! 

[opebo]

Er, I don't think we need Democrats to "save" us from a theocracy, Opebo. Where on earth did you get that impression of my leitmotif?

In one of your posts above you mention that they will prevent an extreme right-ward move in the court due to McCain/Palin appointments.  Knowing you are no social conservative, I assumed that you thought this a positive.  Perhaps I was wrong.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, you vote for social Darwinism, Tory.  What one does matters more than what one mouths.

[DownWithTheLeft]

Janice Rogers Brown would be an awesome pick, its like placing Ron Paul on the SCOTUS, except better

[หมูเด้ง]

Janice Rogers Brown would be an awesome pick, its like placing Ron Paul on the SCOTUS, except better

Probably more like placing....uhh... I duno...Tancredo or Hunter in SCOTUS. 

[Dan the Roman]

I think McCain would appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas, solid conservatives.  Person that comes to mind is Michael Luttig.  If Palin is president, there is really only person I expect her to look at.  She use are momentous occasion as first woman president to appoint another female, a libertarian conservative, Janice Rogers Brown.

Luttig could be confirmed. He would affirm Roe, but would be right-wing. Think Neo-con. I actually expect Luttig to be nominated and confirmed, if McCain wins. Possner would be interesting, too. The entire "baby market" thing and they fact that he supports SOME abortion rights would turn off the whitetrash that will get him elected.

Janice Rogers Brown? I could see her. She not a libertarian conservative, she is a reactionary. I could also see Wilkinson.

Luttig is Scalia's golden boy, I can't imagine him affirming Roe. He spent his academic career railing about it, and doesn't have the right personality to change on the bench. He was arrogant enough to really piss off Bush during his interview which is saying something.

That said, Luttig will not get an appointment from McCain in my view for the same reason that he failed to get one from Bush. The guy is terrible one-on-one and can't hide the fact that he feels like you are wasting your time.  McCain, who puts a lot of emphasis on gut feeling and impressions will likely be as turned off as Bush and appoint someone with similar views but whose more approachable socially. Also, while I a tend to be skeptical of Democrats successfully blocking any right-wing nominee(Thomas got a negative review from the judiciary committee and was confirmed by three votes in a 58-42 Democratic senate) Luttig is someone who would actually manage to run into problems in the Senate, not for his views, but because he won't bother to hide them under a mask of respectability.

I think a likely pick not mentioned is Michael McConnell. After Posner he is probably the most highly thought of appellate conservative in the nation, and he has some moderate credentials for attacking Bush v. Gore which would make him hard to pigeonhole. He's basically a more extreme version of Scalia, except with very weird views on some issues(supports Lochner, but believes the Defense of Marriage act section three is unconstitutional(most who do think its section 2 that is)). Basically he is a maverick conservative judge, which I think would appeal to a maverick President, and is probably as far right as could ever be confirmed(because of his idiosyncrasies.

Wilkinson is a slightly more moderate but less mavericky McConnell. He would actually probably be somewhere between O'Connor and Souter on the court. While he is a Conservative, he is more of a Conservative in the early 1990s which would not be one today.

[Хahar 🤔]

1. Crazies
2. Crazies
3. No

Agree. We'll have the most reactionary court ever.

[Torie]

Michael McConnell is an interesting guy. His specialty is separation of church and state issues, where he come down sort of along the O'Connor lines - no favoritism, no undue burden. But he would not be confirmed to replace a liberal with the Dems having 55 plus votes in the Senate. Wilkinson is a zillion years old. He must be pushing 65 now.

[หมูเด้ง]

1. Crazies
2. Crazies
3. No

Agree. We'll have the most reactionary court ever.

More NATIONALISM THAT YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR!!!

You think they will overturn Brown and reinstate Lochner, and even use Buck v. Bell more?

[Хahar 🤔]

1. Crazies
2. Crazies
3. No

Agree. We'll have the most reactionary court ever.

More NATIONALISM THAT YOUR BODY HAS ROOM FOR!!!

You think they will overturn Brown and reinstate Lochner, and even use Buck v. Bell more?

I wouldn't put anything beyond such a court. Fortunately, if Obama is elected, John Paul Stevens can finally retire in peace in favor of a young liberal.