View Full Version : SCOTUS retirement in the media
Well the media is talking up a Summer SCOTUS retirement with speculation of Kennedy.
If a SCOTUS Justice decides to retire. Do they leave the court or is the typical process to confirm a new justice and then vacate / fill at basically the same time?
I saw that.
They have to vacate first and leave; then the appointment process takes place.
I think that they will have 2 to replace during Trump's term. Maybe 3. Ginsberg gambled that Hilldog would win and she could retire. Now she's literally holding on by a thread that she can outlast Trump. I think Ginsberg, Breyer and Kennedy are all there. Alito and Thomas are not far behind.
I saw that.
They have to vacate first and leave; then the appointment process takes place.
This^
They will recess in June or July and won't start a new session until the first Monday in October. Plenty of time to fill an empty seat.
Thanks.
I just wonder how big the Liberal fireworks will be this go round. If Gorsuch was 'untouchable' with regard to his record. Everyone else they will certainly be more thorough. Or... maybe they will just say screw it.... nuke him in.. to further try to rile their base into a 2020 frenzy of hate. they are surely riding the hate train right now. Actually more so than I recall seeing even directly after the election. I'm not sure if they are airing re-runs or what's going on but there seems to be some renewed hate from the left. Maybe it's just soundbite cycling or part of trying to buy that guy into the GA special election.
Ginsberg..... jeeze, the definition of perverse.
Kennedy retiring would be good but not as good as Breyer or Ginsberg, though it would be good to turn a swing vote into a more conservative seat. It wont "really" change the balance on the court until Breyer and Ginsberg leave. Then, if Trump only has one term, the Dems may get back their two if Alito and Thomas retire.
Maybe DJT will nominate Pryer or Sykes? The left will poop a brick for sure then.
Hope it comes to pass and Trump/GOP have the balls to nuke another conservative in.
Grand58742
04-20-17, 20:44
Hope it comes to pass and Trump/GOP have the balls to nuke another conservative in.
Did it once already. No reason why they won't again.
And the DNC has nobody to blame but themselves over it.
Eurodriver
04-20-17, 20:49
Kennedy Ginsburg and Breyer retiring under Trump's watch would LITERALLY make me get sick of winning.
Kennedy Ginsburg and Breyer retiring under Trump's watch would LITERALLY make me get sick of winning.
Id say be careful what you wish for on that many nominees coming from 1 POV. It is my theory that there is a reason why SCOTUS are life time appointees. Much like the rest of government we want a slow turn over and no gigantic mood swings.
Slow turnover... But that was assuming SCOTUS would follow the Constitution. When we have revisionist justices, we have injustice. Slow turnover or fast, revisionists erode the point of SCOTUS anyway. We do only want one point of view when it comes to the Constitution. From there, views are fine to diverge which we would have regardless.
Id say be careful what you wish for on that many nominees coming from 1 POV. It is my theory that there is a reason why SCOTUS are life time appointees. Much like the rest of government we want a slow turn over and no gigantic mood swings.
There are no guarantees of anything, Souter was a Bush appointment and look how he turned out. Kennedy was a Reagan appointment and not so hot either. So even when you get a Republican appointment there is a tendency to lean left. I would honestly rather let Trump pick them than the next Democratic president.
Moose-Knuckle
04-21-17, 05:01
Ginsberg gambled that Hilldog would win and she could retire. Now she's literally holding on by a thread that she can outlast Trump. I think Ginsberg, Breyer and Kennedy are all there. Alito and Thomas are not far behind.
And this is why every election is more important than the last.
If Trump wins a second term he could stack the court.
platoonDaddy
05-05-19, 15:22
Even though it isn't Scientific, I love it!
A Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Twitter poll asking what type of Supreme Court justices social media users would like to have on the bench apparently backfired when 71 percent of respondents selected “justices like Brett Kavanaugh” compared to just 29 percent who chose “justices like Ruth Bader Ginsburg.”
The poll, which is not scientific and open to anyone with a Twitter account, was posted on May 3 and stated it had two more days before it closed.
However, by Sunday afternoon, the tweet had vanished.
There are no guarantees of anything, Souter was a Bush appointment and look how he turned out. Kennedy was a Reagan appointment and not so hot either. So even when you get a Republican appointment there is a tendency to lean left. I would honestly rather let Trump pick them than the next Democratic president.
Regarding the facts you bring up, why is it only Republican SCOTUS nominees turn traitorous to the party/ideals that nominated them? Have we ever seen a Democrat nominee that turned conservative while on the Court? I certainly can't think of one.
Regarding the facts you bring up, why is it only Republican SCOTUS nominees turn traitorous to the party/ideals that nominated them? Have we ever seen a Democrat nominee that turned conservative while on the Court? I certainly can't think of one.
From a article about Justice Sotomayor:
Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, by contrast, have voted with the conservative justices in several major cases. Most notably, in 2012, Breyer and Kagan joined with the conservatives to declare the Affordable Care Act’s Medicaid expansion unconstitutional, agreeing with the conservative majority that the federal government had unconstitutionally coerced state governments into expanding Medicaid. Only Sotomayor joined Ginsburg’s dissenting opinion.
That trend continued this term. In Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, Breyer and Kagan again joined the five conservatives in focusing on the threats to religious freedom the case presented, more than on the threats to same-sex couples.
https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/7/6/17538362/sotomayor-kennedy-retirement-liberal-wing-dissent-travel-ban-rbg
John Roberts is voting with liberal justices, but he's not one of them
by Melissa Quinn March 08, 2019 12:03 AM
Chief Justice John Roberts’ recent votes with the liberal members of the Supreme Court have given rise to speculation he has become the court’s new swing vote, but court watchers say he has not suddenly moved to the Left.
Instead, the chief justice, 64, now sits at the middle of the court and is working to shield it from accusations the justices are politically motivated, they say.
Analysts characterize Roberts as an institutionalist who cares about protecting the Supreme Court’s reputation, and they note that while he has joined the liberal justices, his votes were primarily on procedural motions rather than the merits of the policies.
If issues like abortion, campaign finance, and affirmative action do come before the court, they don’t expect Roberts to offer any surprises.
“When the rubber hits the road,” Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institute said, “his views are clear, and that’s not going to change.”
“I don’t think what we’ve seen so far is early evidence of Roberts moving to the left or evolving,” Shapiro said. “Nor is it Roberts becoming moderate like Kennedy, the true swing vote. It’s just Roberts trying to use his power at the margins with procedural things to shape what kinds of decisions the court ultimately does rule on.”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/john-roberts-is-voting-with-liberal-justices-but-hes-not-one-of-them
Other interesting articles:
https://empiricalscotus.com/2019/03/19/roberts-left/
https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/supreme-court-justices-become-less-impartial-and-more-ideological-when-casting-the-swing-vote
Interesting theory but his pulling Obamacare out of the trash heap of history and making it a permanent TAX fixture indicates otherwise. That was probably one of the biggest impact cases in a generation and he worked hard to contort what Congress declared was NOT a tax as stated in the Act, into a court decision hung on the gossamer thread of it being entirely a TAX matter. He should have found the Act to be unconstitutional and let Congress rework and revote. That was not balancing on the margins. That was tipping the damn cart over and calling a pig a chicken.
FromMyColdDeadHand
05-06-19, 00:41
Roberts is guilty of the same thing that the Trump crazy dems are- they see something that they don't like, so they think that they, and they alone, are smart enough to 'balance' and make things right. But in doing that, they commit as bad or worse 'crimes' against the system. Plus, at the very least Roberts is going to push narrow decisions on things like guns- even though the precedent is pretty set and the writing is on the wall, but we'll get small rulings until we 'lose' SCOTUS and the new dem SCOTUS will not see anything in the 2A, Heller and McD that prevents everything short of confiscation of muskets.
Never mind the DEms talking about staking the court or some Star Chamber deal that makes it even further divorced from the will of the people.
ThirdWatcher
05-07-19, 05:14
I believe Roberts was compromised.
I believe Roberts was compromised.
It sure was a quick and dramatic turnaround.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.