- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
It bothers me that neither of Trump's 2 SCOTUS picks thus far were really conservative.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:41 am
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:41 am
Have a look at this chart.
LINK
Trump replaced a stalwart conservative, Scalia, with.......Gorsuch, who wasn't anywhere as conservative as Scalia.
Trump replaced a slightly liberal centrist, Kennedy, with............Kavanaugh, who is only a bit conservative.
I don't know much about Amy Barrett, the frontrunner to replace Ginsburg, but chances are she'll only be slightly more conservative than Kavanaugh.
In other words, Trump isn't, and perhaps won't be, tilting the Supreme Court that far right at all. He hasn't nominated anyone as staunchly conservative as Clarence Thomas. These are once-in-a-generation opportunities and we can't be nominating judges who are only slightly conservative.
Obama had no such issues - he nominated Sotomayor, who is by far the most liberal of all the current Supreme Court justices.
LINK
Trump replaced a stalwart conservative, Scalia, with.......Gorsuch, who wasn't anywhere as conservative as Scalia.
Trump replaced a slightly liberal centrist, Kennedy, with............Kavanaugh, who is only a bit conservative.
I don't know much about Amy Barrett, the frontrunner to replace Ginsburg, but chances are she'll only be slightly more conservative than Kavanaugh.
In other words, Trump isn't, and perhaps won't be, tilting the Supreme Court that far right at all. He hasn't nominated anyone as staunchly conservative as Clarence Thomas. These are once-in-a-generation opportunities and we can't be nominating judges who are only slightly conservative.
Obama had no such issues - he nominated Sotomayor, who is by far the most liberal of all the current Supreme Court justices.
This post was edited on 9/20/20 at 2:57 am
21
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:43 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Jeez pal enjoy the victories without being as greedy as Jeff Bezos, shite son
Posted on 9/20/20 at 2:48 am to AnyonebutSteelers
For some reason, Republicans seem to bat .500 with their SCOTUS picks. Dems bat a 1.000.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:14 am to OBReb6
quote:
Jeez pal enjoy the victories without being as greedy as Jeff Bezos, shite son
You’re not seeing what he’s trying to say or acting like you cannot see.
John Roberts was a victory for bush.
Do you get it now?
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:27 am to AnyonebutSteelers
These charts are pretty subjective and oversimplified to be all that useful. Liberal vs. Conservative is an increasingly useless dichotomy when describing judges anyway.
Even if Trump wanted another Thomas, he hasn't exactly had the margin to pull that off.
Hyper partisans on the courts isn't good for the country in the long run, regardless of what the Dems do.
Even if Trump wanted another Thomas, he hasn't exactly had the margin to pull that off.
Hyper partisans on the courts isn't good for the country in the long run, regardless of what the Dems do.
This post was edited on 9/20/20 at 3:33 am
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:31 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Both are textualists.
I personally don't give shite about "conservative" judges. Folow the constitution as written or GTFO.
Both are great appointments. We don't need activist judges (liberal OR consevatives) in the highest court of the Country.
I personally don't give shite about "conservative" judges. Folow the constitution as written or GTFO.
Both are great appointments. We don't need activist judges (liberal OR consevatives) in the highest court of the Country.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:32 am to AnyonebutSteelers
You’ll enjoy Sandy Vajayjay
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:37 am to AnyonebutSteelers
It would probably shock you to learn that neither is President Trump.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:38 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Better than Bush’s appointments
Posted on 9/20/20 at 3:43 am to Texas Yarddog
quote:
Both are textualists.
I personally don't give shite about "conservative" judges. Folow the constitution as written or GTFO.
Both are great appointments. We don't need activist judges (liberal OR consevatives) in the highest court of the Country.
This is correct.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 4:35 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Why should thst bother you unless you’re wanting them to legislate from the bench?
Posted on 9/20/20 at 4:45 am to DavidTheGnome
Exactly. SCOTUS should be completely non-partisan. Unfortunately political hacks get their panties in a wad if judges aren't conventional conservatives or liberals.
The only problem I see is that the progressives will always place a political activist (like Ginsberg) over a constitutionalist or textualist.
The fact that Trump HASN'T put a die hard conservative in the seat shows how moderate he actually is (politically speaking).
This also shows how far left the political spectrum has shifted when a pragmatist (Trump) is labeled "nazi" or "dictator" or "extremist".
The only problem I see is that the progressives will always place a political activist (like Ginsberg) over a constitutionalist or textualist.
The fact that Trump HASN'T put a die hard conservative in the seat shows how moderate he actually is (politically speaking).
This also shows how far left the political spectrum has shifted when a pragmatist (Trump) is labeled "nazi" or "dictator" or "extremist".
Posted on 9/20/20 at 4:45 am to Texas Yarddog
Here you loud and clear. I'm all for adhering to the constitution but his 2 supreme court appointments haven't voted as conservative as I thought they would. Here's to hoping they overturn Roe v. Wade. That shite eats me up everytime I think about our current abortion rights.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 4:49 am to AnyonebutSteelers
The Supreme Court isn't about Conservative versus Liberal. It's about upholding the constitution as written.
Both his picks are considered "textualists." They aren't there to advocate conservative views. Just interpret the constitution.
They should do fine job in that.
Both his picks are considered "textualists." They aren't there to advocate conservative views. Just interpret the constitution.
They should do fine job in that.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 5:08 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Just imagine what billery's would have been. 
Posted on 9/20/20 at 5:48 am to AnyonebutSteelers
That chart is about three years old. So the locations of those new justices is worthless. In fact, was Kavanagh even on the Court yet?
"Conservative" judges can rule two ways. The can rule conservatively in a political manner on a case or they can rule conservatively and stick to only how the constitution reads. The latter can result in them supporting the same outcome as liberals in some cases.
Leftist judges can only rule in one way, a leftist political manner.
That explains why liberal presidents bat 1.000 and republican presidents far less.
"Conservative" judges can rule two ways. The can rule conservatively in a political manner on a case or they can rule conservatively and stick to only how the constitution reads. The latter can result in them supporting the same outcome as liberals in some cases.
Leftist judges can only rule in one way, a leftist political manner.
That explains why liberal presidents bat 1.000 and republican presidents far less.
This post was edited on 9/20/20 at 7:11 am
Posted on 9/20/20 at 5:58 am to AnyonebutSteelers
That’s actually have Supreme Court nominees are supposed to be. If you agree with every one of their rulings that’s a problem.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 6:24 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Reagan did the same thing. Sandra Day O’Connor. I think his advisers have no clue what a real conservative is or they’re just rinos choosing rinos.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 6:30 am to AnyonebutSteelers
Justices are supposed to be constitutional. Scalia himself said that he followed the law even when it's not how he would have voted in his personal life, but he interpreted the law the way it was intended.
Posted on 9/20/20 at 6:38 am to AnyonebutSteelers
I really like Kavanaugh
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News