the official new supreme court thread - Very political

[Highland Deac]

OK - So you agree the Markey tweet was laughable? Glad that's settled.

My suggestion is to focus the outrage on the one individual responsible for setting these wheels into motion... Senator Harry Reid.

You seem to keep forgetting (conveniently) that Reid only lowered the number from 60 to 51 Senators to confirm lower federal court nominees, not the Supreme Court (McConnell did that), and that the only reason Reid did that was because McConnell and Senate Republicans kept filibustering and holding up confirmation of nearly every Obama judicial nominee. But yeah, just blame it all on Reid and not where it really belongs - McConnell and Senate Republicans for changing long-standing precedents on presidents being able to name judges. And how about Barrett getting her federal judge appointment in 2017 because McConnell and Senate Republicans wouldn't name a black female Obama appointee to that position? Any problems with that, Angus?

 

[BarcaDeac]

originalism sucks and any nominee by Trump would likely adhere to it, it's not specific to her confirmation.

 

[birdman]

LOL - So a black Supreme Court justice ("Uncle Thomas" for those playing at home) swore in a female justice last night.

Yet the dems and the Tunnels posters are upset because somehow this proves racism and sexism???

Call me crazy... but I'm starting to detect a pattern of the left crying out "RACISM" and "SEXISM" every time they don't get their way.

I actually agree with this. The left called people like Romney and Bush racist and sexist and comparatively speaking to the Trump administration, those two guys were MLK reincarnate. Historically we've probably over played the racist and sexism card to the point that it became meaningless to a lot of voters and they didn't quite understand how fucking bad Trump was/is.

 

[dcnelso]

originalism sucks and any nominee by Trump would likely adhere to it, it's not specific to her confirmation.

I don’t think originalism itself it an awful idea, it’s that they are using it as a pretense to make political rulings and overturn the will of the majority.

I’m not a lawyer, so definitely not versed in all legal theory, but to me it makes general sense as the basis of interpreting a law or statute to be 1) a textualist approach of what does the law actually say in the words, then 2) what was the original meaning and intent generally understood by the authors of that law from the legislative process.

If a judge is true to an originalist interpretation of certain laws, then that legal view can actually help overrule certain discriminatory laws that can be facially neutral on the language, while understanding the intent behind it was to discriminate towards a certain group.

I think the problems with today’s federalist society judges is its moved to such an extreme that they are using the “originalist” so-called approach to roll back laws and societal changes that they could never do legislatively again. I also do fear when judges can just make the law themselves, but republicans have basically abandoned any legitimacy as a ruling party and only play politics for power instead of legislating for the good of society, and I say that as a registered republican who votes straight Democrat now since they republicans took control of North Carolina around 2010, and I saw how everything they did was more screw the libs versus advancing a policy goal of helping people.

 

[Henry Chinaski]

Part of it is “originalism” interpretation of a law that was written in the late 1700s vs. laws passed in the 20th century are not exactly the same thing....

 

[BillBrasky]

The Constitution: Originalism as the Bible: Evangelism

Conservatives act like both documents are sacred, but they pick and choose which parts to highlight and which parts to ignore. At the end of the day they wipe their ass with both.

 

[DistrictDeacon]

I don’t think originalism itself it an awful idea, it’s that they are using it as a pretense to make political rulings and overturn the will of the majority.

I’m not a lawyer, so definitely not versed in all legal theory, but to me it makes general sense as the basis of interpreting a law or statute to be 1) a textualist approach of what does the law actually say in the words, then 2) what was the original meaning and intent generally understood by the authors of that law from the legislative process.

If a judge is true to an originalist interpretation of certain laws, then that legal view can actually help overrule certain discriminatory laws that can be facially neutral on the language, while understanding the intent behind it was to discriminate towards a certain group.

Barrett straight out said in her confirmation hearings that 2) would be too burdensome. She’ll be a Justice on the highest court in the land with a team of clerks deciding the most consequential cases and she thinks she won’t have time to read the legislative record.

She’s a hack. Expand the court to 15 and banish her to writing little read dissents for the rest of her life.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

Why the fuck are Congress Democrats talking like tough guys right now, it’s embarrassing.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

I actually agree with this. The left called people like Romney and Bush racist and sexist and comparatively speaking to the Trump administration, those two guys were MLK reincarnate. Historically we've probably over played the racist and sexism card to the point that it became meaningless to a lot of voters and they didn't quite understand how fucking bad Trump was/is.

Just because Romney and Bush engages in a “lower level” or less overt example of racism than Donald doesn’t mean that there should have been silence on racism when it popped up. That conservatives won’t condemn open racism now because it became more meaningless that racism continued to occur isn’t the democrats problem. Maybe it’s a political liability but if conservatives wanna be racist that’s their own shortcoming.

 

[PhDeac]

Just because Romney and Bush engages in a “lower level” or less overt example of racism than Donald doesn’t mean that there should have been silence on racism when it popped up. That conservatives won’t condemn open racism now because it became more meaningless that racism continued to occur isn’t the democrats problem. Maybe it’s a political liability but if conservatives wanna be racist that’s their own shortcoming.

Yep. It's not crying wolf if the wolves keep getting more obvious.

 

[LilburnDeac]

The Constitution: Originalism as the Bible: Evangelism

Conservatives act like both documents are sacred, but they pick and choose which parts to highlight and which parts to ignore. At the end of the day they wipe their ass with both.

The Constitution: Originalism as the the Bible: Literalism.

Both are stupid and wrong and intellectually lazy.

 

[deactherunner]

You seem to keep forgetting (conveniently) that Reid only lowered the number from 60 to 51 Senators to confirm lower federal court nominees, not the Supreme Court (McConnell did that), and that the only reason Reid did that was because McConnell and Senate Republicans kept filibustering and holding up confirmation of nearly every Obama judicial nominee. But yeah, just blame it all on Reid and not where it really belongs - McConnell and Senate Republicans for changing long-standing precedents on presidents being able to name judges. And how about Barrett getting her federal judge appointment in 2017 because McConnell and Senate Republicans wouldn't name a black female Obama appointee to that position? Any problems with that, Angus?

Nope. Harry Reid is the "one and only" person responsible. Point still stands.

 

[Shooshmoo]

LOL - So a black Supreme Court justice ("Uncle Thomas" for those playing at home) swore in a female justice last night.

Yet the dems and the Tunnels posters are upset because somehow this proves racism and sexism???

Call me crazy... but I'm starting to detect a pattern of the left crying out "RACISM" and "SEXISM" every time they don't get their way.

Sexual Predator, who, based on his alleged originalism should agree that he doesn't have the right to vote and is not a full person in the eyes of the law, confirms female justice who thinks women, other than her, should be subservient to men and men should control women's bodies, all under the watchful eye of Serial Sexual Predator President who also thinks that black people and women are lesser. And she'll join another Serial Sexual Predator already on the bench, again nominated by Serial Sexual Predator President. Great job, GOP. The best people. Very Christian of you. At least you have a black friend and a female friend, I guess.

 

[CraftDeac87]

LOL - So a black Supreme Court justice ("Uncle Thomas" for those playing at home) swore in a female justice last night.

Yet the dems and the Tunnels posters are upset because somehow this proves racism and sexism???

Call me crazy... but I'm starting to detect a pattern of the left crying out "RACISM" and "SEXISM" every time they don't get their way.

Typical rightwing gaslighting. Your posts sound like thinly veiled racist facebook memes.

 

[CraftDeac87]

Sexual Predator, who, based on his alleged originalism should agree that he doesn't have the right to vote and is not a full person in the eyes of the law, confirms female justice who thinks women, other than her, should be subservient to men and men should control women's bodies, all under the watchful eye of Serial Sexual Predator President who also thinks that black people and women are lesser. And she'll join another Serial Sexual Predator already on the bench, again nominated by Serial Sexual Predator President. Great job, GOP. The best people. Very Christian of you. At least you have a black friend and a female friend, I guess.

The sad part is nearly every word of this is true, yet he'll come back with some alt-right word vomit like "facts don't care about your feelings!"

 

[WakeandBake]

Colonel Angus is a proud member of a group of people who laugh it up when their members believe George Soros put Jews in the gas chamber when he was 12 or whatever

 

[DG3]

Colonel Angus is a proud member of a group of people who laugh it up when their members believe George Soros put Jews in the gas chamber when he was 12 or whatever

BAN HIM!

 

[HoosierDeac]

Wishful thinking- what are the chances ramming through this nomination actually depresses Republican voter turnout? E.g. Pubs who say "we got our judges, I'm good" and don't end up voting?

 

[Shooshmoo]

That's a level of nuanced thinking no potential Trump voter is capable of.

 

[dcnelso]

I did hear an interview on the news with undecideds, and one did say she would vote for Biden after ACB was confirmed as abortion was her number one priority, though that has to be a tiny number of voters. I’d imagine anyone who was planning to vote Trump due to judges issues will just talk themselves into still voting for Trump under the “packing the court” fear campaign.