Kavanaugh

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

clacy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1128
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2011 8:16 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by clacy » Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:55 am

Oh boy.....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/08/supreme ... -fall.html

Kavanaugh was bad enough, but if Trump replaces RBG it will get UGLY
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:10 am

clacy wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:55 am
Oh boy.....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/08/supreme ... -fall.html

Kavanaugh was bad enough, but if Trump replaces RBG it will get UGLY
Certainly people will be angry... But he could nominate Amy Coney Barrett and how could they stop it?
jacksonM
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by jacksonM » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:12 am

Xan wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:10 am
clacy wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:55 am
Oh boy.....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/08/supreme ... -fall.html

Kavanaugh was bad enough, but if Trump replaces RBG it will get UGLY
Certainly people will be angry... But he could nominate Amy Coney Barrett and how could they stop it?
If RBG hangs on for another year it will be interesting to see if the Republicans still believe in the rule of not confirming a supreme court judge in a presidential election year.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:22 am

jacksonM wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:12 am
Xan wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:10 am
clacy wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 8:55 am
Oh boy.....

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/08/supreme ... -fall.html

Kavanaugh was bad enough, but if Trump replaces RBG it will get UGLY
Certainly people will be angry... But he could nominate Amy Coney Barrett and how could they stop it?
If RBG hangs on for another year it will be interesting to see if the Republicans still believe in the rule of not confirming a supreme court judge in a presidential election year.
I think that was more of a "the Senate doesn't have to", not that they must not. And anyway, didn't Biden come up with that "rule" in the first place back when he was the Senate judiciary chairman in the.. early 90s?
User avatar
Tyler
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2066
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Tyler » Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:40 am

Love or hate Trump, these supreme court appointments show why his election was so pivotal.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 4392
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Thu Nov 08, 2018 11:11 am

Tyler wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:40 am
Love or hate Trump, these supreme court appointments show why his election was so pivotal.
No kidding. He hasn't been there two years and has made two picks. One was a "refresh", one a sort-of-flip, now there's a flip potentially on the table and another flip (Breyer?) isn't out of the question. A refresh for Thomas is also a possibility.
User avatar
InsuranceGuy
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 425
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2015 1:44 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by InsuranceGuy » Thu Nov 08, 2018 9:23 pm

[deleted]
Last edited by InsuranceGuy on Mon Mar 08, 2021 8:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
boglerdude
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1313
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2016 1:40 am
Contact:

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by boglerdude » Fri Nov 09, 2018 12:16 am

Tyler wrote:
Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:40 am
Love or hate Trump, these supreme court appointments show why his election was so pivotal.
What do you mean...is it not just coincidence that these appointments came about while hes in office? I got the impression Trump supporters just hated Hillary and immigration and didnt think about the court.
Kbg
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2815
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Kbg » Fri Nov 09, 2018 10:05 am

The judicial philosophy difference couldnt be more stark. I’m waiting to see if Republican justices become “activists” for causes on the right. If they stay true to the philosophy they should (basically) be overturning judicial legislating at lower levels and kicking things back to state and federal legislatures. For example, overturning Roe v Wade would be entirely consistent if the decision was in a way that gave it back to the states while a ruling that broadly made abortion illegal would be activist.

One that seems activist to me is political money being considered free speech.
Post Reply