Patterico's Pontifications

6/27/2018

Supreme Court: No More Forced Union Dues for Public Sector Unions

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:52 am

Three cheers for the Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 Wednesday in Janus v. AFSCME that nonunion workers cannot be forced to pay fees to public sector unions.

The case, one of the most hotly anticipated of the term, is the second in two days to hand a major victory to conservatives, following Tuesday’s holding by the court that President Donald Trump’s travel ban is constitutional. Some experts have said that a holding in favor of the plaintiff, Mark Janus, would be the most significant court decision affecting collective bargaining in decades.

They have been taking these dues from me at gunpoint for years.

I have one question.

Do I get my money back?

[H/t: Steve Malynn.]

[Cross-posted at The Jury Talks Back.]

263 Responses to “Supreme Court: No More Forced Union Dues for Public Sector Unions”

  1. Dingaling baby

    Patterico (115b1f)

  2. So do you think you’d have been better off without collective bargaining, Patterico?

    TR (2c5752)

  3. So do you think you’d have been better off without collective bargaining, Patterico?

    Yes.

    At the very least, I should have been able to make that decision for myself.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  4. Freedom of speech is just so key I think.

    I’m a make a cortado!

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  5. How many more years will this be in the courts? Any chance the lower courts who ruled wrong will decide the case with the clarity to prevent years of follow up suits?

    When can members get out? Can unions require members to resign in person at an undisclosed location?

    Does this wash out the SLAP hit the blog owner took so he’s happy again?

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  6. Anyone want to bet how this would have gone with Merrick Garland on the Court?

    NJRob (b00189)

  7. To those who didn’t vote for Trump: You’re welcome!

    random viking (6a54c2)

  8. I wonder how Harriet Miers would’ve come down on this.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  9. About the same as Alito, coming from RTW Texas and all….

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  10. Funny argument from Kagan about forcing people to pay dues they don’t want to pay;

    “So the majority’s road runs long,” Kagan added. “And at every stop are black-robed rulers overriding citizens’ choices. The First Amendment was meant for better things. It was meant not to undermine but to protect democratic governance– including over the role of public-sector unions.”

    Citizen choices must mean something different to her.

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  11. Sadly, part of this finding hinged on the fact that there are more public sector union employees than private.

    Does DJT have the stones to seek a ban on public employee unions?

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  12. In WI after compulsory dues were overturned, members stopped paying en masse. Then they decided the unions didn’t really represent their goals.

    “The legislation has saved the state over $5 billion since its implementation. More than $3 billion was saved thanks to modest contributions to benefits from public employees, and the reform saved the struggling Milwaukee Public Schools over $1 billion……

    …….In the metro area of Madison, a hive of organized labor, union membership has decreased significantly since its peak of 21.1 percent of the workforce in 2010. When the law really started to effect change in contracts in 2012, the rate dropped to 10 percent. The state’s capital city employs many of the state employees affected by the legislation, – many of whom joined the massive, big labor-led protests against Act 10 at the Capitol in late winter 2011.

    Despite liberal Madison’s seeming love of unions, only 5.4 percent of Madison area workers were union members in 2016. While there were well over 56,000 members in the Madison metropolitan area in 2010, there were just over 20,000 as of the most recent data.

    http://www.maciverinstitute.com/2017/10/wisconsin-union-membership-plummets-in-wake-of-worker-freedom-laws/

    If you really want to know what people want, give them freedom of choice.

    Next step: retroactive reimbursement!!

    harkin (e5c973)

  13. Our esteemed host asked:

    Do I get my money back?

    [snort!] Yeah, sure you do. All that you have to do is locate the right office and fill out the paperwork.

    The snarky Dana (5ce6d1)

  14. We owe a big thanks to our president, President Donald Trump, for this beautiful 5-4 ruling that does freedom all up in it.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  15. Weren’t public unions created by an EO? Couldn’t he just cancel it?

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  16. Executive Order 10988 is a United States presidential executive order issued by President John F. Kennedy on January 17, 1962 that recognized the right of federal employees to collective bargaining. This executive order was a breakthrough for public sector workers, who were not protected under the 1935 Wagner Act.

    Can Trump just cancel it? Technically Nixons replacement EO.

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  17. Next, mandatory bar membership requirements to practice law.

    Steve Malynn (296daf)

  18. Now be careful what you wish for, because these right to work laws in various occasions have occasioned teacher strikes, that have been capitulated to.

    Narciso (1dffc8)

  19. Next, mandatory bar membership requirements to practice law.

    Steve Malynn (296daf) — 6/27/2018 @ 8:45 am

    Agree with the sentiment, but this is like asking public employees to vote to curb their pensions.

    random viking (6a54c2)

  20. I learned the line, “Money is fungible,” here on this blog.

    Ingot9455 (75888e)

  21. This case and NIFLA v. Becerra were both victories for free speech.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  22. When will the presidents people be free to eat?

    mg (9e54f8)

  23. Edward from SFV wrote:

    Sadly, part of this finding hinged on the fact that there are more public sector union employees than private.

    It’s simple: in the private sector, unions have to, in the end, be partners with employers. They cannot demand so much that the companies fail; what good does it do to win a $100.00 per hour wage for employees getting zero hours a week?

    But with the public sector, the ‘companies’ cannot fail. Their ‘customers’ do not have the option of going elsewhere, and the customers’ money is simply taken from them, by the taxing authority, backed up by the police power of the state. The public officials who have to negotiate with the unions don’t give a f(ornicate), because their jobs don’t depend on profit. That’s why you see teachers demanding, and getting, raises far in excess of median family income in their areas, requiring tax increases on people earning less than teachers, to give teachers more money.

    Does DJT have the stones to seek a ban on public employee unions?

    That’s a wholly different thing. Freedom of speech and freedom of association means that unions cannot be banned; this decision simply means that people cannot be forced to pay dues to unions. It is ‘right to work’ written nationwide. Sort of, anyway.

    What could be done is to simply refuse public sector union demands: allow them to strike, and allow people to see just how f(ornicating) useless so many government offices are. If the entire departments of commerce, labor, or education shut down, would we be worse off? If Health and Human Services shut down, we’d be immeasurably better off, or at least the people who have worked for a living would be. Welfare malingerers, not so much, but you might be able to imagine just how many tears I would shed over their plight.

    The economist Dana (5ce6d1)

  24. “@DanaGoldstein
    Follow Follow @DanaGoldstein
    More
    This will impact 22 union stronghold states, including CA, NY, and IL. Decision was written by Alito. The same issue was before the court when Scalia died; Court deadlocked 4-4. Another huge political/policy/social change due to Gorsuch winning a seat.”

    Would Russiagaters forgive and forget, dismiss as ‘conspiracy theory’ if Scalia equivalent died this conveniently in Putin’s Russia? Regardless, they and #NeverTrumpers would have thrown away this victory as well!

    Dysphoria Sam (312848)

  25. George Will, Bill Kristol and Evan McMullin hardest hit. Ted Cruz vindicated.

    NJRob (7159b7)

  26. Speaking of free speech, Mr. Van Norden in the NYT is agin it. He must be frustrated that his “superior” ideas aren't prevailing, so he’s proposing that there be institutional and media gatekeepers to filter out the "bad" ideas.

    Instead, I suggest that we could take a big step forward by distinguishing free speech from just access. Access to the general public, granted by institutions like television networks, newspapers, magazines, and university lectures, is a finite resource. Justice requires that, like any finite good, institutional access should be apportioned based on merit and on what benefits the community as a whole.

    This would implicitly mean that people like Mr. Van Norden–presumably with the backing of government power–would be deciding what content has “merit”, which is basically a trashing of the First Amendment. It would be worse than the so-called Fairness Doctrine. He favorably cites Herman Marcuse, identifying the man as a "20th century German-American philosopher", neglecting to mention that the guy was a career-long Marxist, agreeing with him in principle about "suppressing right-wing perspectives" but only disagreeing in the application of such suppression. Also, the title is a straw man. No one has the right to an audience. He's a bad left-wing philosopher because, when you boil it all down, he's just another free-speech denier.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  27. Hes a Chinese philosophy expert, particularly on confucius.

    Narciso (1dffc8)

  28. I wonder if the “ignorant” who Van Norden would deny access to media includes those who advocated socialism for Venezuela.

    harkin (b63958)

  29. No he thinks like van Jones who blames private networks for trying to defeat ‘The wonderful revolution of chavez.

    Narciso (1dffc8)

  30. Switching gears a little, and not that we should need reminding, but the document between Trump and Fat Kim was a communique, not an agreement.

    North Korea has continued to upgrade its only known nuclear reactor used to fuel its weapons program, satellite imagery has shown, despite ongoing negotiations with the US and a pledge to denuclearise.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  31. Elie Mystal
    @ElieNYC
    God dam* this f**king piece of s**t country. And the piece of s**t racists controlling ALL THREE branches of government. #SCOTUS

    Thoughtful reflection from an NPR legal editor.

    harkin (b63958)

  32. Like the Samantha bee writer who thinks civility is a,tool of white supremacy,

    Narciso (1dffc8)

  33. “Continued work at the Yongbyon facility should not be seen as having any relationship to North Korea’s pledge to denuclearize. The North’s nuclear cadre can be expected to proceed with business as usual until specific orders are issued from Pyongyang.”

    From the report.

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  34. To those who didn’t vote for Trump: You’re welcome!

    The Republican senate stopped Garland, not Trump.

    Dave (445e97)

  35. Veddy Eentresting, Mr. Montagu; POTUS might let Fat Kim pop off a strong dud South Korea’s way after they helped Mexico into the round of 16.

    urbanleftbehind (760d23)

  36. (on banning public sector unions) That’s a wholly different thing. Freedom of speech and freedom of association means that unions cannot be banned;

    It’s hard for me to see how (involuntary) collective bargaining (for non-members) survives the same First Amendment analysis applied today in Janus.

    Dave (445e97)

  37. North Korea has continued to upgrade its only known nuclear reactor used to fuel its weapons program, satellite imagery has shown, despite ongoing negotiations with the US and a pledge to denuclearise.

    Unexpectedly!

    Dave (445e97)

  38. From the opinion (incoming Truth-bomb alert):

    “Many private groups speak out with the objective of obtaining government action that will have the effect of benefiting nonmembers. May all those who are thought to benefit from such efforts be compelled to subsidize this speech?”

    DOWN GOES FRAZIER! DOWN GOES FRAZIER!

    Dave (445e97)

  39. Three cheers for Neil Gorsuch. And ultimately Donald Trump. I despised candidate Trump. Just ask Rev. Hoagie if you yourself can’t remember. Ultimately I had to vote for him because the alternative was voting for someone who had absolute contempt for me.

    I never knew any CIA contract operators. I did know CIA careerists and have no use for them.

    Which is probably why the CIA had to farm the job out. No, I can’t tell you.

    But I did know DSS agents and I respect them. They’ve got a command center in the Washington area And Clinton and Rice couldn’t find their way their there while those agents were fighting and dying for us.

    If Hillary Clinton has such little regard for her own agents, she has none for me.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  40. Breaking- Fox reporting Justice Kennedy to retire July 31.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  41. Justice Kennedy is going out on a high note. This has been a good week for the First Amendment, and a good week for the SCOTUS. His departure will, frankly, make way for many more such good weeks in the next Term of Court.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  42. Obama’s $800 billion stimulus went mainly to local governments such as the one involving my employment and Patterico’s too. We did get raises so that the union cut was increased and kicked back to the Dem party and local politicians. To quote Obama:

    “Shovel-ready was not as … uh .. shovel-ready as we expected.”

    AZ Bob (9a6ada)

  43. Who is next in the pipeline that’s a guaranteed constitutionalist?

    NJRob (7159b7)

  44. People on the Left are going crazy over Kennedy resigning.

    I mean, crazier.

    I just wish—wish upon wish—President Trump would smile, be kind, knock off the tweets and silliness. Yes, the press wants to make him look as bad as possible. But he should be smarter than they are. Because they aren’t smart.

    Fingers crossed.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  45. @45. Our Captain apparently has said he’ll pick a name off that HF-approved list he already has.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  46. From the official WH website: President Donald J. Trump’s Supreme Court List (last updated 11/17/2017).

    But for the rocky relationship between the POTUS and his AG, William Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit would be a favorite: Pryor was Sessions’ Deputy AG of Alabama before Sessions was elected to the Senate, and his hand-picked successor in that office before Dubya recess-appointed to the Eleventh.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  47. Beldar, who do you favor from the list?

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  48. @44. Except they’re not. A Republican-nominated judge gives a Republican president a head’s up and the opportunity for same to nominate his successor. NBD. And no surprise. More interesting is the timing what w/midterms coming up. Trump apparently wants someone in place before November.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  49. @ Simon Jester: There are several on the list I don’t know enough about to say. I’d be comfortable with Pryor, or Sen. Mike Lee, or Brett Kavanaugh of the D.C. Circuit. Diane Sykes, who was, along with Pryor, one of the two names Trump offered as potential nominees during the 2016 GOP primary debates, is probably too old at 60. I’m happy for Judge Don Willett to be on the Fifth Circuit (he was still on the Texas Supreme Court when the list was last updated), but he wouldn’t be among my choices for the SCOTUS, actually (although I certainly wouldn’t oppose him).

    It’s entirely possible that among the other names, there’s another jewel like Gorsuch, but I haven’t yet done the investigation to have informed opinions about that.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  50. He’s not as clueless now as he was w/G; he’ll staff it out then go w/someone o/t list most favoring for his base. McConnell on Senate floor says they will vote on successor this fall.

    Sometimes the turtle moves quickly.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  51. Do I get my money back?

    Oh, man! I sure hope so; But prolly not.

    “And hast thou slain the Jabberwock?
    Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
    O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!”
    He chortled in his joy.

    felipe (023cc9)

  52. Kavanaugh, like Gorsuch, was a Kennedy clerk.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  53. Trump lies.

    I am not tired of winning.

    AZ Bob (9a6ada)

  54. random viking (6a54c2) — 6/27/2018 @ 7:59 am

    The words you are looking are…

    felipe (023cc9)

  55. Pick the region where his base is the shakiest/weakest and needs shoring up and that individual will shoot to the top of the list.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  56. President Trump’s legacy just gets better and better! He’s a colossus and a juggernaut both and this is why he’s so beloved by the American people to this day.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  57. Interesting hypothetical:

    Suppose Thomas steps down in a year or two, and health issues of some kind force one of the aging liberals off the court before 2020.

    With a solid, relatively young, 6-3 conservative minority in place for the foreseeable future, do Supreme Court nominations recede as the bogey-man that drives both sides to support vile candidates like Clinton and Trump out of fear for what the other side will do to the Court?

    Of course, lower-level court appointments will always be important, but I think they lack the emotional force of the Supreme Court.

    Dave (445e97)

  58. Will Flake and McCain block a vote as they’ve threatened to do on judges?

    NJRob (7159b7)

  59. conservative *majority

    duh

    Dave (445e97)

  60. Paul Ryan’s Amnesty Bill Fails — Far Fewer Votes than Goodlatte’s

    could pedophile Mitt Romney’s slicked up and ready boytoy Paul Ryan BE more of a loser? (rhetoric question)

    why did he waste everybody’s time on this

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  61. Will Flake and McCain block a vote as they’ve threatened to do on judges?

    i can see sleazy corrupt bob corker and the abortion-loving lobsterpot bimbo joining in too

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  62. Maybe Trump should nominate Cruz. The Senate would affirm him just to save themselves from him his company, and the appointment might save Cruz himself from the ignominy of losing his Senate seat to Beto O’Rourke.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  63. Leviticus,

    only in your dreams will Cruz lose to the fake. Cruz will easily be reelected by double digits.

    NJRob (7159b7)

  64. Not time to read all of the comments, but I think I’ve read that lawsuits are being filed to reclaim dues paid.

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  65. “Ultimately I had to vote for him because the alternative was voting for someone who had absolute contempt for me.”

    – Steve57

    Man. That is a really, really good way to sum up the flawed candidacy of Hillary Clinton.

    Leviticus (efada1)

  66. that’s good thinking Mr. Leviticus!

    you should write that on an index card and submit it in the suggestion box

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  67. Does DJT have the stones to seek a ban on public employee unions?

    That’s a wholly different thing. Freedom of speech and freedom of association means that unions cannot be banned; this decision simply means that people cannot be forced to pay dues to unions. It is ‘right to work’ written nationwide. Sort of, anyway.
    The economist Dana (5ce6d1) — 6/27/2018 @ 9:15 am

    True, as far as it goes. Employees can join unions. But, there’s nothing in the constitution that requires employers, public or private, to bargain with unions. The employer should have the right to say, no, I will only bargain with the employees themselves, one on one.

    And if the federal government were to take that stance, that would be the end of public employee unions at the federal level.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  68. Related: With (presumably) greatly reduced prospects for cross-over by Kennedy’s replacement, or any of the other conservative justices, does Bader-Ginsberg decide to throw in the towel, leading to the same 6-3 scenario?

    Dave (445e97)

  69. Actually, Leviticus, appointing Cruz would be Beto O’Rourke’s only hope of winning. And I don’t think Cruz would accept a SCOTUS appointment now.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  70. public employee unions can be banned for sure they already are in certain sectors like the tranny-trash mattis military for example

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  71. 41 — His comment in his concurrence yesterday in the Travel Ban case takes on added significance today.

    There are numerous instances in which the
    statements and actions of Government officials are not
    subject to judicial scrutiny or intervention. That does not
    mean those officials are free to disregard the Constitution
    and the rights it proclaims and protects. The oath that all
    officials take to adhere to the Constitution is not confined
    to those spheres in which the Judiciary can correct or even
    comment upon what those officials say or do. Indeed, the
    very fact that an official may have broad discretion, discretion
    free from judicial scrutiny, makes it all the more
    imperative for him or her to adhere to the Constitution
    and to its meaning and its promise.

    The Court cannot be counted on to correct all “wrongs”. The political branches of government have obligations to the text of the constitution.

    I think his message is that the Court is not the appropriate forum to resolve political disputes which underlie policy differences, and over the last several decades it has been increasingly used as a vehicle for such fights.

    shipwreckedcrew (56b591)

  72. Breaking- Fox reporting Justice Kennedy to retire July 31.
    DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/27/2018 @ 11:05 am

    So you tell me. Is there a God or is there not a God?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  73. “They have been taking these dues from me at gunpoint for years.

    I have one question.

    Do I get my money back?”

    My understanding is the union that represents the DDA’s in LA County is a voluntary organization, meaning you don’t have to belong or pay dues, even though they are the authorized entity for collective bargaining for the DDA’s. So “who has been taking money at gunpoint for years” from you?

    pete (a65bac)

  74. And He loves me and wants me to be happy. Because, Beer. Cheers!

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  75. Brett Kavanaugh’s ivy league trash but Amy Coney Barrett isn’t plus she’s younger

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  76. Kennedy to retire! SEarch begins…

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  77. @72. Meh. Ask Vlad. Trump will.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  78. Chris Matthews needs a valium.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  79. people are getting exciting and forgetting that all of this completely depends on if Justice Kennedy doesn’t change his mind

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  80. @79. Depends, Mr. Feet?! At 81 he’s glad he can change his underwear.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  81. My understanding is the union that represents the DDA’s in LA County is a voluntary organization, meaning you don’t have to belong or pay dues, even though they are the authorized entity for collective bargaining for the DDA’s. So “who has been taking money at gunpoint for years” from you?

    You didn’t have to join but the county still deducted and sent your money to the union based on the theory that you got the benefit of the union services. You could pay a little more and have the right to vote, which I did only for the purpose of severing our ties to the SEIU public employees union, which was ultimately accomplished.

    AZ Bob (9a6ada)

  82. Chuck Schemer on the floor of teh Senate maintaining that the continuation of a mother’s right to kill the child she carries must be the qualifier for the replacement.

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  83. Duckworth hits McConnell: Americans should have voice in selection of next Supreme Court justice

    oof take THAT Mitch

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  84. “People on the Left are going crazy over Kennedy resigning.

    I mean, crazier.”

    Thanks for that correction, Simon, I almost sprained my forefinger on it’s way to my phone keyboard.

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  85. mike lee’s middle name is shumway

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  86. people are getting exciting and forgetting that all of this completely depends on if Justice Kennedy doesn’t chrange his mind
    happyfeet (28a91b) — 6/27/2018 @ 12:15 pm

    Then it depends on who Trump nominates.

    But imagine if it was Clinton.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  87. The surname Shumway was an occupational name for a cobbler. The name Shumway is derived from the Old German words “schuoch” and the suffix “mann,” which means shoe maker.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  88. Elie Mystal
    @ElieNYC
    God dam* this f**king piece of s**t country. And the piece of s**t racists controlling ALL THREE branches of government. #SCOTUS

    Thoughtful reflection from an NPR legal editor.

    harkin (b63958) — 6/27/2018 @ 10:18 am

    There is an epidemic of Mad Low-Brow Disease afflicting the Left

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  89. ugh *change* his mind i mean Mr. 57

    Clinton’s in poor health I’m afraid she’s been on my prayer list for over a year now

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  90. Dave, no. It means that the next time the Dems control the legislature and the executive, they will bring back Roosevelt’s court packing plan.

    aphrael (2582ce)

  91. Justice Kennedy retiring. What would a President McMuffin do?

    One thing’s for certain… whatever McMuffin would do, he would not be paying for it!

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  92. @#23 ###Dana – FDR on LIne 1 for you.

    Of COURSE that fatuous tool Kennedy waited until now to announce, despite Grassley and many others literally begging him to make it known months ago, which would virtually assure a full SCOTUS sitting on 10/1. Do NOT even begin to try to make the case that he was a principled Justice. By his arrogant refusal to give good notice, he all but assured a more political process as things will be pushed to the very height of the mid-term elections.

    Good riddance to rubbish.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  93. Dave, no. It means that the next time the Dems control the legislature and the executive, they will bring back Roosevelt’s court packing plan.

    aphrael (2582ce) — 6/27/2018 @ 12:33 pm

    May that darkest of days never come…

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  94. Mr. Feets, didn;t I tell you there would not be a forth time? Jesus said to go innermost room and pray.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  95. Matthew

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  96. Jesus is very good advise Mr. 57

    Currently Flake’s holds are impacting 13 circuit court nominees who are awaiting confirmation hearings, votes in committee, or votes on the floor, according to a Judiciary Committee source.

    dildo

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  97. 5And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. Truly I tell you, they already have their reward. 6But when you pray, go into your inner room, shut your door, and pray to your Father, who is unseen. And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. 7And when you pray, do not babble on like pagans, for they think that by their many words they will be heard.…

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  98. Mr. Feets. what would I do without you?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  99. 7And when you pray, do not babble on like pagans, for they think that by their many words they will be heard.…

    Yeah, but try and tell (certain) people that…

    Skorcher (5b282a)

  100. @ aphrael (#90): I agree with your prediction.

    Beldar (169151)

  101. Add Michael Cohen’s name to that list, eh, Captain, sir!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  102. seems like Giuliani has quietly disappeared

    maybe it’s just a lull though

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  103. There is zero chance that either RBG or Breyer will resign while a Republican POTUS is in office. Either of them would have to be carried out in a box. Both remain sharp and seem reasonably healthy for their ages. It is not a physically taxing job.

    Cruz, about 50 minutes ago on TV: “I think the single best choice that President Trump could make to fill this vacancy is Sen. Mike Lee.”

    I agree.

    Beldar (169151)

  104. Sen. Schumer is now on record for the proposition that the Senate should consider no nominee in an even-numbered year. What a clown!

    Beldar (169151)

  105. @85. Gee, Mr. Feet, Mikey called the Captain ‘unfit for command’ and to withdraw after the Access Hollywood tape broke. Assuming Utah Willard wins in November, ‘ya think our Captain would want to reward level-tree-Mittens, who’s favorite meat is hot dog with becoming instant Senior Senator and reward Mikey, too? Doubtful.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  106. very good point

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  107. My prediction is that RBG will get scratched by a zombie a la Liv Moore to stay alive–or undead–long enough for a Democrat to get elected president.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  108. Cruz, about 50 minutes ago on TV: “I think the single best choice that President Trump could make to fill this vacancy is Sen. Mike Lee.”

    I agree.
    Beldar (169151) — 6/27/2018 @ 12:51 pm

    Problem is, with the current state of the Senate, Lee would need his own vote to get confirmed. Unless they wait until January, after the election. But, McConnell said their will be a vote in the fall. I doubt they want to try it twice, have Lee fail in the fall and then try him again in January.

    So, won’t be Lee.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  109. @103. If you can delineate the political advantage to Trump for nominating a senator from Utah who called for his withdrawal from the race after the AH tape was released, please do. Otherwise, don’t see him rewarding Lee or Cruz–or Willard for that matter– in any way. He’s vindictive and carries a grudge. Age and shoring up and weak region in his base will dictate recommendation by staff to Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  110. That series is just to silly at this point; Seattle turning into the zombie capital, lol.

    Narciso (411ef5)

  111. dildo jeff flake aside

    the lobsterpot bimbo would vote for lee

    the tundra bimbo would not vote for lee

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  112. oopers i meant lobsterpot would NOT vote for lee

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  113. That series is just to silly at this point; Seattle turning into the zombie capital

    Yeah, I hung on because I still like the writers, and I’m a Veronica Mars fan, a series should have lasted a lot longer.
    I’m still chuckling about ‘Palomino’ Pelosi.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  114. Plus, can McCain travel at this point? I suspect he won’t. So, unless Trump wants to give the weak sisters of the Senate a pro abortion pick, I think we are going to get a nominee who won’t get through just before the election.

    If the American people come through on election day and give us some reliable, pro-Trump GOPers – new vote – and we will get a shiny new SCOTUS member.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  115. Lee can retire. Tie vote in Senate cast by its president, Pence. Lee would be a brilliant choice. Collins and McCain are poised to ruin this conservative moment. They would not stand in Lee’s way.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  116. @106. Besides, Mr. Feet, it’s a cinch McCain, assuming he’s still able and with us, will vote ‘no’ to anybody Trump floats– just because, because, because, because, because, of all of the wonderful things he does…

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  117. aphrael, was the Court packing plan include adding to the number of justices? I thought I read that it was. So that seems more significant than just appointing certain justices.

    //

    Also as a former public employee, THANK YOU SCOTUS for JANUS!! Biggest money laundering operation in US history. When we sued our union, they stipulated that 80% of the “dues” were paid for Dem candidates. Imagine what the true amount was, if they agreed to 80%!

    Patricia (3363ec)

  118. hat series is just to silly at this point; Seattle turning into the zombie capital, lol.
    Narciso (411ef5) — 6/27/2018 @ 1:02 pm

    Considering the head tax they just tried to pass, considering them the zombie capital ain’t so weird.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  119. mccain is a sleazy treasonous coward but he’s also know to be a horrible misogynist

    i think if trump nominated a lady judge mccain would have trouble opposing her

    but then he’d just play the cancer card and stay home

    he’s entitled to the seat you see, even if he’s not up to the job

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  120. @115. See #105/#109. Don’t see carry-a-grudge-Trump rewarding him at all. He keeps needling McCain too and McCain will be a Navy man to the end and if it’s the last thing he’ll do, he’ll torpedo anything Trump.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  121. Look, I love it when leftists eat their own young.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  122. ugh *known* to be I mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  123. @119. If it’s down to his last word, McCain will have the last word.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  124. DCSCA, I think the first thing you need to learn about me is that I never carry a grudge. Hate is expensive and I can’t afford it. And if you allow me to advise you about anything, neither can you.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  125. i won’t have the last word for sure cause of i’m a be moderatered :(

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  126. @124. ??? Trump does.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  127. Have you missed the fact that I’ve defended McCain? Let me repeat myself.

    https://valor.militarytimes.com/hero/23680#54607

    Distinguished Flying Cross
    AWARDED FOR ACTIONS
    DURING Vietnam War
    Service: Navy
    RANK: Commander
    GENERAL ORDERS:

    CITATION:

    The President of the United States of America takes pleasure in presenting the Distinguished Flying Cross to Commander [then Lieutenant Commander] John Sidney McCain, III (NSN: 0-624787), United States Navy, for heroism while participating in aerial flight on 26 October 1967 in North Vietnam. While attacking the thermal power plant at Hanoi, Commander McCain, despite extremely heavy and accurate anti-aircraft fire and more than fifteen surface-to-air missiles in the air, pursued the attack until his aircraft was hit by enemy anti-aircraft fire. Although his aircraft was severely damaged, he continued his bomb delivery pass and released his bombs on the target. When the aircraft would not recover from the dive, Commander McCain was forced to eject over the target. By his exceptional courage, superb airmanship, and total devotion to duty, Commander McCain reflected great credit upon himself and upheld the highest traditions of the United States Naval Service.

    I just want him out of the Senate. Other than that I wish him all the best.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  128. Not just anybody gets the DFC.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  129. I don’t even think the fact his dad was an Admiral could have swayed it.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  130. @ Anon Y. Mous, who wrote (#108):

    Problem is, with the current state of the Senate, Lee would need his own vote to get confirmed. Unless they wait until January, after the election. But, McConnell said their will be a vote in the fall. I doubt they want to try it twice, have Lee fail in the fall and then try him again in January.

    So, won’t be Lee.

    And (#114):

    Plus, can McCain travel at this point? I suspect he won’t.

    I count 50 GOP votes, with Pence as the 51st, even with McCain not present. There’s no reason why Lee couldn’t vote for his own confirmation. Rand Paul, the squirreliest GOP senator of all, is squarely behind Lee — and just said so on national TV. And it’s not outside the realm of possibility — I’m not saying it’s likely, but it’s not inconceivable — that if the vote occurs in, say, October, Lee might get a couple of Dem votes like Joe Manchin (D-WV) & Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND). Lee’s seat would in turn go to a reliable appointee by a GOP governor and would be at no risk in the ensuing confirming special election.

    Would Trump be capable of putting aside grudges to nominate Lee? I doubt it, but I’d love to be surprised to find myself wrong.

    Beldar (169151)

  131. Lots of fresh red meat for the slow-news-summer-TeeVee-talkers to feed on. What tasty tidbit could add seasoning to this stew?!?!

    Mueller completing and releasing his report.

    Are you not entertained?!?!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  132. hrm

    dildo-lick jeff flake is making noises what *might* could be interpreted as reasonable

    But Flake, like most in the GOP, expects the president to nominate someone far more conservative than Kennedy, a long-standing swing vote.

    “I can’t imagine right now the president going for a … Kennedy mold. It’s his choice,” Flake said. “This is the seat. The last one simply reaffirmed the balance. This is the change. That’s why I always thought the Democrats miscalculated by going after Gorsuch.”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  133. That series is just to silly at this point; Seattle turning into the zombie capital, lol.

    Narciso (411ef5) — 6/27/2018 @ 1:02 pm

    Teh combination of zombies and a lotta caffeination may be a cause for concern.

    Colonel Haiku (59ae41)

  134. Recall that the moment of greatest glory within the GOP caucus in the Senate of the 115th United States Congress was when, in a single meeting with virtually no advance preparation, it unanimously nuked the rest of the nominations filibuster rule. Susan Collins, Jeff Flake, Rand Paul, Lisa Murkowsi, John McCain — everyone was instantly on board, no dissents, no wavering, no regrets expressed after.

    That happened because Gorsuch was such an obviously qualified nominee, not because of any sort of spirit of solidarity among GOP senators — otherwise they would have nuked the cloture rule altogether (for regular-order legislation as well as nominations).

    Moral: Trump needs to pick someone as solid as Gorsuch. I think Lee, Kavanaugh, or Pryor would qualify. I’m open to persuasion that others on the list would, too, but I’m not already persuaded (just for lack of knowledge about them).

    Beldar (169151)

  135. I strongly suspect Justice Kennedy put in a plug for Kavanaugh in his 30-minute interview with Trump today.

    Beldar (169151)

  136. @106. Wonder who’s Putin’s pick of the litter? Our Captain will no doubt ask out of courtesy. It is amusing, Mr. Feet, to watch staunch and relentlessly judgmental anti-never-no-nyet-Trump conservatives suddenly rallying to the opportunity presented to him. A broken clock right twice-a-day thing.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  137. @135. Makes sense.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  138. There’s no reason why Lee couldn’t vote for his own confirmation.
    Beldar (169151) — 6/27/2018 @ 1:30 pm

    Even if he technically could, somehow I just can’t see it happening. Plus, Flake has claimed he will stop confirming Trumps nominees unless Trump backs off on tariffs. Trump won’t, so if Flake sticks to his commitment to #Resist, it’s down to 49. Plus, the weak sisters, Collins and Murkowski. Though they didn’t make a fuss over Scalia’s replacement, I suspect they will want to try to prevent someone more conservative than Kennedy from getting through. They will want a moderate.

    The GOP needs more Senators, so I think it will come down to the election.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  139. In the delightful movie Election (1999) — SPOILERS ALERT! — the goofy, Omaha-cornfed, good-guy candidate for Student Body President, Paul Metzler (played by Chris Klein), nobly casts his own vote for his psychotic opponent Tracy Flick (brilliantly played by Reese Witherspoon) — resulting in Flick’s victory by exactly one vote.

    I think Mike Lee is probably sharper than Paul Metzler.

    Beldar (169151)

  140. @134. Thing is, you know how Trump operates by now; he’s not that interested in the specifics, only the spectacle– and ratings; staff will produce a short list from that FS/HF list considering age and best political advantage/appeal to the base then Trump will meet and pick the person he clicks with to co-star at the announcement ceremony.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  141. Beldar, I’ve been proven wrong so many times. That’s the difference. When I’m wrong I say I’m wrong. I admit it and move on. This is why I’m your intel officer. Your intel officer is never wrong?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMMceEx72sE

    Navy Carrier Squadrons “Move Along”

    I was officially a member of a Navy Fighter squadron. I am unofficially a member of an E-2 squadron. I’ve got the plaque. I can prove it.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  142. #83, Duckworth neglects to mention that it was an upcoming presidenial election that actually did allow Americans to have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court Justice. They could pick the next President and he would nominate the SC candidate.

    If Democrats like Duckworth had their way the SC nominee of the most corrupt degenerate fascist Muslim pig in our nation’s history would (at the end of his tenure, and one step ahead of the law) would alone have forced a Senate confirmation vote without any real opportunity for ordinary Americans to voice their current opinions. Duckworth’s argument is pure duck talk.

    The same conditions do not apply today, we have only a Mid-term election and that over 4 months away and which applies to the House and only 1/3rd of the Senate. The President, the exclusive nominator of SC justices, isn’t on the ballot, and no matter the outcome of the Mid-terms, Donald J Trump remains President and exclusive nominator.

    We look forward to a nominee on par with Trump’s previous excellent SC selection. The American people will have an opportunity in November to voice their opinions by rejecting Democrats across the board.

    The anti-American b@stards have earned nothing less than a complete repudiation at the polls. It’s been a long time coming and it’s almost here.

    ropelight (7bb9e5)

  143. @ Anon Y. Mous, re your predictions about Flake, Collins, and Murkowski: If you’re correct, then why did they join every other GOP senator in nuking the remainder of the filibuster rule for nominations on behalf of Gorsuch?

    Beldar (169151)

  144. Awesome video, Steve57 (#141)! Thanks! And any intel from you is always welcome in my briefing room!

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. With everything going on over the past 24 hrs, this has to be my favorite headline today, via Yahoo News:

    Bernie Sanders: Sarah Huckabee Sanders Should Be Allowed To Eat In Restaurants

    You helped create this mob Bernie, enjoy!

    harkin (b63958)

  146. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGE_vpPIoIU

    I am entirely comforatable with a black man with a rifle.

    Should anyone care.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  147. Thing is, you know how Trump operates by now; he’s not that interested in the specifics, only the spectacle

    Oh honestly! Do you think he picked Gorsuch’s name out of a hat??

    Patricia (3363ec)

  148. @ Anon Y. Mous, re your predictions about Flake, Collins, and Murkowski: If you’re correct, then why did they join every other GOP senator in nuking the remainder of the filibuster rule for nominations on behalf of Gorsuch?
    Beldar (169151) — 6/27/2018 @ 1:54 pm

    That was Scalia, this is Kennedy. Plus, Flake is about tariffs, not moderate SCOTUS. Different motive in his case.

    I could be wrong. But, are you unable to see the potential difference for the pro-abortion crowd? They went along with Scalia-like replacement for Scalia. That doesn’t mean they are automatically on board for a Scalia-like replacement for Kennedy.

    Voting to end the filibuster was not a promise to vote for any and all nominees put forward by Trump. We shall see.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  149. The White House SCOTUS replacement list as per Mediaite:

    Amy Coney Barrett of Indiana, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

    Keith Blackwell of Georgia, Supreme Court of Georgia

    Charles Canady of Florida, Supreme Court of Florida

    Steven Colloton of Iowa, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

    Allison Eid of Colorado, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

    Britt Grant of Georgia, Supreme Court of Georgia

    Raymond Gruender of Missouri, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

    Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

    Brett Kavanaugh of Maryland, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

    Raymond Kethledge of Michigan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

    Joan Larsen of Michigan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

    Mike Lee of Utah, United States Senator

    Thomas Lee of Utah, Supreme Court of Utah

    Edward Mansfield of Iowa, Supreme Court of Iowa

    Federico Moreno of Florida, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida

    Kevin Newsom of Alabama, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

    William Pryor of Alabama, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

    Margaret Ryan of Virginia, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

    David Stras of Minnesota, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

    Diane Sykes of Wisconsin, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

    Amul Thapar of Kentucky, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

    Timothy Tymkovich of Colorado, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

    Robert Young of Michigan, Supreme Court of Michigan (Ret.)

    Don Willett of Texas, Supreme Court of Texas

    Patrick Wyrick of Oklahoma, Supreme Court of Oklahoma

    harkin (b63958)

  150. From Trump’s point of view: He gets a win here even if he just throws a dart at the list.

    Going off-list would be a crap-shoot for confirmation and, of course, for future performance.

    Several people on the list are from state supreme courts, and they’re generally not well known outside their own states. I’m in favor of appointing state supreme court judges to the federal trial and appellate benches in general, because there’s a huge amount of talent among their ranks; but they don’t generally write on issues of federal law, especially federal constitutional law, and as compared to someone like Kavanaugh, they don’t have the requisite record to generate confidence about future performance/non-drift.

    I include Don Willett, recently of the Texas Supreme Court and now on the Fifth Circuit, in this critique, actually. One of his most famous opinions from the Texas Supreme Court was decided on substantive due process grounds under the Texas state constitution, and while I like the result it reached — overturning a ridiculously protectivist state statute restricting those providing “eyebrow threading” services — I’m terrified of anyone who uses any sort of substantive due process analysis for anything; it’s a red flag that he might become another Kennedy, IMHO, although probably not a Souter.

    Best-case for Trump is that he turns this into an effective, positive campaign issue by picking someone as good as Gorsuch. As that nomination showed, we can count on the Dems to overplay their hand even against the least controversial choices he could make from that list. The more unquestionably fit the nominee — meaning, in part, the better-known the nominee — the better the chances of pro-GOP blow-back, or at least GOP-base revving, from this decision. I hope he doesn’t pick one of the lesser known names on the theory that a stealth candidate will be easier to get confirmed, because that theory is essentially irrelevant post-Gorsuch.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  151. My guess: Edward Mansfield of Iowa, Supreme Court of Iowa.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  152. Apologies, I was actually remembering Justice Willett’s concurring opinion in the eyebrow threading case I linked in #150.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  153. @151. Better still, Steven Colloton of Iowa, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

    He’s only 55.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  154. Umm, no.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  155. Flake is not sure if his judicial-tariff blockade applies to the Supreme Court.

    “If there were a vacancy there? I hadn’t thought of that. I haven’t thought of that,” he said Tuesday.

    Flake is vacillating regarding SCOTUS, as is his flaky nature, so who knows.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  156. President Trump’s gonna knock it out of the park by picking the best choice (again)

    His instincts for this sort of thing are flawless

    Right out of the park! (baseball metaphor)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  157. Also from Trump’s point of view: If he nominated Kavanaugh, he’d need to immediately nominate a replacement for Kavanaugh whom McConnell would commit to also push through before the election. For purely personal reasons (like the appeal of any orders enforcing a grand jury subpoena against him), Trump does not want to lose a GOP-appointed spot on the DC Circuit, even briefly, during the next term of Congress.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  158. DCSCA, I couldn’t vote for Hillary. She abandoned her own agents. uWe can agree to disagree but that is not one thing.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  159. At the annual National Music Publishers Association conference, Makan Delrahim, head of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division, remarked that the DOJ is currently reviewing the consumer protection agreements decided upon by the Justice Department and ASCAP and BMI, the music industry’s two largest performing rights licensing organizations. What this means is that the Justice Department will soon choose between protecting the local music scene and lining the pockets of big money corporate music interests.

    ASCAP and BMI are monopolies that control 90% of performing rights to songs. Virtually everyone that wants to publicly perform music, from restaurants to hotels to concert halls, must go through them.

    Both ASCAP and BMI have a history of abusing their market share. Since their businesses hinge on managing intellectual property — an area where there is no true free market — there is little competition and hence no way of stopping their price gouging.

    That’s why the federal government put them under consent decrees in the 1940s: to ensure that the music collectives provide establishments with licenses to their entire collections at fair market rates, with a rate court handling all disagreements. These settlements have significantly helped in stopping their practice of charging rates that might make sense for their bottom lines but don’t make sense for anyone else, not even the songwriters they allege to protect.

    libertyunyielding

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  160. @156. Swing for the fences!!! Eh, Mr. Feet?!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zbRxWEF2Rw

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  161. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/27/supreme-court-justice-anthony-kennedy-to-retire.html

    They were saying he maybe could retire, but he gavw no warning.

    I think it will be hard for any nominee to be confirmed. It might, this year.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  162. This is a remarkably clear-eyed and intellectually honest piece from left-leaning law prof Rick Hasen. Read it if you enjoy tasting well-distilled liberal tears. Key sentence, with which I entirely agree as a rational assessment of the situation created by this announcement:

    Democrats have no cards to play here.

    I likewise agree with this, and have already said so here:

    even if all the Democrats voted no, there’s no filibuster and no stopping the nominee with their votes. And if you think that senators like Jeff Flake would buck Trump on a nominee like Kavanaugh, forget it. They may disagree with Trump about a lot of things, but not about hard-right judicial nominees.

    The only political hope here is for massive street protests, like we saw with the initial Trump travel ban to try to convince senators like Susan Collins of Maine or Lisa Murkowski of Alaska to vote no. It’s a long shot because we’ve seen these senators fold time and again. But it is worth trying.

    And they’ll try, but I repeat: They voted for the nuke that set this situation up without a single blink. This is the issue over which all GOP politicians have every incentive to hold ranks, so long as Trump stays on the list.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  163. NeverTrumper Power Anthem

    1985

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  164. To those who lamented Ted Cruz’ endorsement of Trump after the convention, in fulfillment of the promise Cruz made to support the GOP nominee at the beginning of the primaries, I repeat: What Cruz got in return — the most valuable “ask” he could have proposed, Trump’s public commitment to stick to the (original, since-expanded) list — has turned out to be awfully valuable, and not to Cruz personally, but to the country.

    And Trump has gotten so very much positive reinforcement from the Gorsuch nomination. Now Justice Kennedy has handed him another golden egg. All he needs to do is not to drop it, or to smash it in a fit of pique, and pick someone from the list, whom McConnell will duly and promptly get confirmed.

    Applying my consistent principle for predicting Trump’s behavior: What’s best for the Trump Brand? Obviously, picking someone from the list.

    Thank you again, Sen. Cruz.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  165. What Cruz got in return — the most valuable “ask” he could have proposed, Trump’s public commitment to stick to the (original, since-expanded) list — has turned out to be awfully valuable, and not to Cruz personally, but to the country.

    Thank you again, Sen. Cruz.
    Beldar (fa637a) — 6/27/2018 @ 3:00 pm

    *snicker*

    Cruz’s big ask was that Trump do what Trump already said he would do. And when Trump does that, you credit Cruz instead of Trump?

    Lawyers twisting things to advocate their own position look pretty silly at times. Trump gets the credit. Face reality.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  166. Trump did not put out a list of specific names, nor promise to put out such a list, until the very day of the Cruz endorsement, and both acknowledged that as the quid pro quo.

    I don’t deny Trump credit for picking from the list. If he picks from the list again, I will again sing his praises.

    Shall we now start trading insults? I’m twisting nothing, but regardless, I am not the issue.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  167. Dave, no. It means that the next time the Dems control the legislature and the executive, they will bring back Roosevelt’s court packing plan.

    Ha! And other than tradition and comity, there is no obstacle to packing the court FDR-style, either.

    How well have tradition and comity been holding up in Washington lately?

    Dave (59a371)

  168. Trump did not put out a list of specific names, nor promise to put out such a list, until the very day of the Cruz endorsement, and both acknowledged that as the quid pro quo.
    Beldar (fa637a) — 6/27/2018 @ 3:10 pm

    Trump put out his initial list of 11 specific names on 5/18/16. He expanded the list by 10 additional names on the same day Cruz endorsed, 9/23/16.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/19/us/politics/donald-trump-supreme-court-nominees.html

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  169. From September 23, 2016, here is Cruz’ endorsement. Key paragraphs (boldface mine):

    After many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience, I have decided that on Election Day, I will vote for the Republican nominee, Donald Trump.

    I’ve made this decision for two reasons. First, last year, I promised to support the Republican nominee. And I intend to keep my word.

    Second, even though I have had areas of significant disagreement with our nominee, by any measure Hillary Clinton is wholly unacceptable — that’s why I have always been #NeverHillary.

    Six key policy differences inform my decision. First, and most important, the Supreme Court. For anyone concerned about the Bill of Rights — free speech, religious liberty, the Second Amendment — the Court hangs in the balance. I have spent my professional career fighting before the Court to defend the Constitution. We are only one justice away from losing our most basic rights, and the next president will appoint as many as four new justices. We know, without a doubt, that every Clinton appointee would be a left-wing ideologue. Trump, in contrast, has promised to appoint justices “in the mold of Scalia.”

    For some time, I have been seeking greater specificity on this issue, and today the Trump campaign provided that, releasing a very strong list of potential Supreme Court nominees — including Sen. Mike Lee, who would make an extraordinary justice — and making an explicit commitment to nominate only from that list. This commitment matters, and it provides a serious reason for voters to choose to support Trump.

    I have twisted nothing.

    And what I’m saying here is what I said here, in this comment on a post by our host entitled “Judges an Inadequate Fig Leaf for Cruz’s Endorsement.” I wrote:

    I do agree with you that this is mostly a fig leaf. In other words, it would certainly not have been enough to justify Cruz’ decision if Cruz hadn’t also made his own promise — not to Trump, but to the RNC, the GOP generally, and the voting public — during the primaries. But if, as I believe, Cruz had concluded that he was indeed going to keep his own commitment, then identifying this “exclusive list” publicly, and committing Trump to it, was indeed probably the best and most reasonable “ask” he could have expected Trump to entertain when relayed back through Pence. Cruz was very, very explicit in painting this as a deliberate and overt quid-pro-quo, with Pence (not Trump) able to confirm that in the future; neither Pence nor Trump have challenged anything Cruz said about the discussions; and thus, having Pence in this loop was essential and very, very smart.

    If Trump wins, but deviates from the commitment, then Cruz certainly would have laid now as good a foundation as can be laid for holding Trump politically accountable in the future. Yes, it ain’t much in context, but it was indeed something of some value, something worth bothering to do, in addition to the fact that it gave Cruz the fig leaf to point to as something “new,” “important,” and “post-convention.”

    Does that mean Trump will behave himself and be accountable? Of course not, but that’s beyond anything anyone, including Ted Cruz, can do to affect him.

    This was a dead-stick landing. Any of those you can walk away from is, by definition, a good one, even if you’re pretty bloody.

    I remember it clearly because it was one of the comparatively few occasions when I’ve disagreed with our host. He may still disagree, but I believe he has at least forgiven Cruz for the most part.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  170. The May list was described as “indicative”, not exclusive, wasn’t it?

    Dave (59a371)

  171. Your link is to a list of “potential Supreme Court picks” that, as you say, Trump released on May 19, 2016. It contained no commitment by Trump to pick from it exclusively. To the contrary, as your link clearly says:

    Mr. Trump said in a statement that his shortlist was “representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value and, as president, I plan to use this list as a guide to nominate our next United States Supreme Court justices.”

    A “guide” is not a commitment. Cruz got a written, unequivocal commitment in September 2016 that Trump would pick exclusively from that list. (There was actually no mention of any possibility of updating the list, nor a limitation of Trump’s commitment to his first term; but let’s not quibble about those details unless and until they matter, eh?)

    Here is the list of potential nominees Trump had said, back in May 2016, would be his guide:

    The Trump list includes six federal judges, all very conservative jurists appointed to federal appeals courts by President George W. Bush, and five conservative state Supreme Court justices. The federal judges are: Steven Colloton of Iowa, Raymond Gruender of Missouri, Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, Raymond Kathledge of Michigan, William Pryor of Alabama, and Diane Sykes of Wisconsin. The five state Supreme Court justices are: Alison Eid of Colorado, Joan Larsen of Michigan, Thomas Lee of Utah, David Stras of Minnesota, and Don Willet of Texas.

    Who’s missing?

    Neil Gorsuch.

    So what have I twisted?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  172. Actually, on a moment’s second thought, I withdraw that question at the end of #172, Anon Y. Mous. I don’t care what you think I’ve twisted. The facts are apparent, and I’m not the issue here.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  173. I have twisted nothing.
    Beldar (fa637a) — 6/27/2018 @ 3:23 pm

    You are crediting Cruz for the actions of Trump. Actions that Trump would have taken without Cruz’s advocacy. Trump gave Cruz a fig leaf and you think Cruz was driving the outcome. It was Trump’s initiative all along. As evidenced by Trump’s announcement that he will use his list again to replace Kennedy. And you will give Cruz the credit for that as well.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  174. I tend to agree with AYM to the extent that no promise, commitment or undertaking entered into by Donald Trump is worth the spittle that flies out of his mouth while lying about it.

    The true believers have conditioned his lizard brain to understand that he can say anything, and then do anything else, without political consequence.

    Dave (59a371)

  175. Ted Cruz for Supreme Court!

    Mike Lee might be an easier confirmation, but Senator Cruz is so universally hated that the Senators would do almost anything to get him the Hell out of the Senate.

    The hopeful Dana (5ce6d1)

  176. Dave asked:

    Related: With (presumably) greatly reduced prospects for cross-over by Kennedy’s replacement, or any of the other conservative justices, does Bader-Ginsberg decide to throw in the towel, leading to the same 6-3 scenario?

    The only way that President Trump gets to appoint someone to the seat currently being moldered in by Justice Ginsberg is if she drops stone cold graveyard dead. She’d go to work in a wheelchair, with a chest tube, arterial line and poop bag before retiring while Mr Trump is in office.

    The realistic Dana (5ce6d1)

  177. I give Cruz credit for committing Trump unequivocally, in public, in writing, in an explicit quid quo pro made in negotiations between Trump’s VP nominee and the GOP runner-up intended to unify the GOP after the convention going into the general election, to the original list of twenty (actually 21 with the addition of Lee) SCOTUS nominees.

    I give Trump credit for fulfilling that public, written, explicit commitment by picking Gorsuch, a name on the September list who was not on the May “guide.”

    No one can prove or disprove any assertion about who Trump might have chosen to fill the Scalia seat absent that written commitment. Might it have been Gorsuch, who was not on the May guide-list, but who could fairly be described as “in the mold of Scalia” and consistent with the guide-list? Maybe.

    But recall the history of Trump during the campaign. The first time he was quizzed about who he might appoint, the only judge he could think of was his sister. Then before the GOP debates, anticipating further questioning and not wanting to draw laughter and hoots of derision by re-proposing his sister, he got a couple of names, Diane Sykes and Bill Pryor, from conservative thinktanks. By the day after the debate when he mentioned them both by name, he’d already forgotten Pryor’s name, and could only come up with Sykes’ name as an example. And he waited until May, by which time he had the committed convention votes needed to be nominated, before he even issued his “guide”-list.

    Making an exclusive and explicit public commitment in writing to the list turned out to be a huge political plus for Trump; following his commitment has likewise been a plus; and as you mentioned, he volunteered on TV today that he will make this choice from that list as well.

    But he made no written commitment to pick exclusively from a specific list before Cruz’ endorsement. He’d deliberately structured the May list to be non-exclusive, so his instincts, clearly, were to keep some wiggle-room, which indeed is the political norm for candidates.

    I find unpersuasive speculation that somehow, without Cruz’ prompting, Trump would have had the revelation that committing himself might actually be the huge political plus it has undoubtedly since become. Regardless, that’s speculation; and in the real world, there was indeed a direct causal connection between Trump’s commitment and Cruz’ endorsement. And I give Cruz credit for that, which I thought then, and think now, is important and worthy of recognition — independently of the credit I also give to Trump for committing and then following that commitment.

    Beldar (169151)

  178. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) will be a yes on confirmation: he’s up for re-election, in a state which supports President Trump by a wide margin, and if he kills a nomination, he can count on being retired by the voters in November.

    The very realistic Dana (5ce6d1)

  179. But recall the history of Trump during the campaign. The first time he was quizzed about who he might appoint, the only judge he could think of was his sister.
    Beldar (169151) — 6/27/2018 @ 4:04 pm

    False. He was asked about his sister. He did not bring up her name. Did you really believe that #fakenews lie, or are you happy to recirculate it regardless?

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  180. DCSCA,do I need to repeat myself.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  181. it seems like all the drama queen antics surrounding this next confirmation could give sleazy bob mueller and the hot and horny men and women of the corrupt and dirty fbi a chance to quietly slink off the stage (albeit in disgrace)

    will bob’s handlers let him take it though

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  182. Mr 57 wrote:

    DCSCA,do I need to repeat myself.

    Why not? After all, everyone else here does!

    The very snarky Dana (5ce6d1)

  183. the sisters of pedophile Mitt Romney and cowardpig John McCain were never in any danger of being nominated to no courts that’s for sure

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  184. Breaking News: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a permanent injunction preventing Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy from resigning!

    The unsurprised Dana (5ce6d1)

  185. Matthew Kovach @mattiek17

    Literally in tears. Haven’t felt this hopeless in a long time. With Justice Kennedy leaving, we now have two options as Americans: get fitted for your Nazi uniform or report directly to your death camp. How do you fight the darkness without light? My spark is going out. #SCOTUS
    2:09 PM – Jun 27, 2018

    ok so there’s a lot of deranged hyper-emotional people today

    but read this tweet for reals just once

    yup.

    My spark is going out.

    ok so now imagine being one of those berobed ugly chicks on the supreme court

    we’ve already seen this week how loopy their dissents have become – especially kagan

    sotomayor’s loopy too but she’s the stupidest justice so sometimes it’s hard to tell if she’s being loopy or just stupid

    but once kennedy’s replaced

    that’s their whole future

    increasingly loopy stupid dissents

    to the horizon and beyond

    couldn’t you imagine this being kind of depressing and deflating

    to be old ugly and irrelevant with no hope of any of that changing for the whole rest of your whole life

    womp womp

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  186. The only way that President Trump gets to appoint someone to the seat currently being moldered in by Justice Ginsberg is if she drops stone cold graveyard dead. She’d go to work in a wheelchair, with a chest tube, arterial line and poop bag before retiring while Mr Trump is in office.

    That’s certainly the conventional wisdom, but I still wonder. As a practical matter, in the short term, there is little difference between a court with five Alito’s and a court with six. And as the saying goes, in the long run (which isn’t that long for an octogenarian…) we’re all dead.

    Dave (445e97)

  187. https://www.abmc.gov/cemeteries-memorials/europe/pointe-du-hoc-ranger-monument#.WzQenyAnZpk

    “June 6, 7:10 a.m.: Two landing craft were lost, but the Rangers debarked and started up the cliffs. They pressed upward, supported by the destroyer USS Satterlee. One of the Rangers’ DUKWs was disabled by enemy fire en route to Pointe du Hoc. The engine failed. Three Rangers were casualties, including one ked…

    The crew of the Satterlee did their utmost. Now, ask me about the USS Monssen and Chesty Puller.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  188. Yes, Trump was prompted with his sister’s name, but only after drawing a blank as to anyone else. Here’s the interview, with Trump on Bloomberg Politics on August 26, 2015 (video, at 15:46 (my transcription):

    HALPERIN: Let’s talk about the Supreme Court. If you’re president, that’s one of the big responsibilities of the president, nominating justices. Is there somebody you have in mind, either a current or a past justice, who would be kind of a model for you?

    TRUMP: Heh-heh. You know, I would have — had Justice Roberts not come out with that horrible decision on Obamacare, which was a disaster, he should have ended Obamacare — I really liked his gait, I really liked his thought process, I liked his background, but he is, he is not at all — I’m not at all a fan. No, I would say: Very smart, great levels of intelligence, uh, great temperament — temperament is very important — believe it or not, I have a good temperament, some people say, gee, he is a little bit tough, but I actually have a very good temperament, or you wouldn’t be in places like this.

    HALPERIN: You’ve mentioned, you’ve talked about Carl Icahn and other people you might want in your administration. Is there someone out there today who you’d — say, who isn’t on the Court, but you’d say, “This is the kind of person I’d consider for the Court”?

    TRUMP: Well, I don’t want to mention names, I think it’s inappropriate to mention names, it’s certainly at this stage, where, you know, it’s so early, and you have a long way to go —

    HALPERIN: How about your sister?

    TRUMP: Oh, my sister’s great, I have a sister who’s on the court of appeals, and she’s fantastic, but —

    HALPERIN: Do you think she’d be a good Supreme Court Justice?

    TRUMP: I think she’d be phenomenal. I think she’d be one of the best. But frankly, I think she is — we’ll have to rule that out, at least temporarily. But I do have a sister who’s very smart, and a very good person.

    Perhaps Trump could have come up with all the names that eventually became the list of 20 in September 2016. Or perhaps he could have come up with all of the names that were on the “guide” list in May 2016. Or perhaps he could have come up with the names of Sykes and Pryor. Or perhaps he was secretly thinking, “Neil Gorsuch,” and didn’t want to tip his hand. We’ll never know.

    But what we do know is that when asked, the only name he came up with was Roberts, whom he immediately said he wasn’t a fan of, and then after flailing around, when Halperin mentioned his sister, Trump said she’d be “phenomenal, one of the best.”

    I interpret this as Trump needing a multiple choice test to even make a guess, and when prompted with the obviously wrong answer, he jumped on it. (Halperin suckered him, but it’s an obvious question for which Trump should have been prepared, of course. And he should have been prepared to respond to questions about his sister and her record.) But you can project whatever inner thoughts onto Trump you choose.

    Beldar (169151)

  189. oh dear

    somebody threw chicken poopies on the red hen

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  190. http://destroyerhistory.org/benson-gleavesclass/index.asp?pid=43608

    …Aboard the Monssen came Lt. Col. “Chesty” Puller, his first lieutenant aide and two signalmen. Puller was then a battalion commander. He went up to the bridge and informed Capt. Smoot that Marines were to be landed behind the Japanese lines in an effort to encircle them and force a crossing of the Matanikau River. Four boats carrying Marines (about 200) came out and followed the Monssen to Point Cruz, a projection of beach about a mile west of the Matanikau. The Monssen shelled the jungle behind the beach with 5-inch gunfire, and the Marines landed without opposition and disappeared into the jungle…

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  191. “The Republican senate stopped Garland, not Trump.”

    True – and Trump nominated Gorsuch, not today’s version of David Souter.

    harkin (b63958)

  192. Five inch guns and all, the Monssen wasn’t really all off that safe.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  193. the important thing was President Trump stopped Hillary cold

    even after the hot and horny men and women of the sleazy corrupt fbi subverted justice for her

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  194. (Halperin suckered him, but it’s an obvious question for which Trump should have been prepared, of course. And he should have been prepared to respond to questions about his sister and her record.)

    Trump? Prepared??

    o stahp it…

    :)

    Dave (445e97)

  195. Breaking #FakeNews: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an injunction prohibiting President Trump from nominating anyone other than Merrick Garland or @HillaryClinton to the seat being vacated by Justice Kennedy!— Dana Pico (@Dana_TFSJ) June 27, 2018

    The Dana on Twitter (5ce6d1)

  196. I don’t even believe the the FBi is full of sleaze bags. But even if they were, I’d still fix you up with a Zabaglione.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  197. And an FBI agent.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  198. In the late spring of 1979, late in my second year of law school, I took over the day-to-day responsibilities of being the Book Review Editor for the Texas Law Review. My predecessor from the previous TLR editorial board had successfully solicited a book review from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, then a professor at NYU. And although he handed over to me the editing responsibilities for several other in-progress book reviews, he kept the editing of that one to himself, for she was already moderately famous as a legal scholar, and she normally wrote for more prestigious journals at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, or Columbia. She was named by Jimmy Carter to the D.C. Circuit on April 14, 1980, filling one of the many new judgeships created by statute the previous year, and about that same time, her book review appeared in the same issue of the Texas Law Review in which my own law review note was published. So we’ve shared, as credited authors, the front page of a nationally regarded law journal; but I missed, by just a little, my chance to work with her during the editing process, which I’ve always regretted.

    She has been a prolific writer and hard worker throughout her career. Perhaps she’d resign during the term of a Republican POTUS, but that would be very much out of character.

    Beldar (169151)

  199. True – and Trump nominated Gorsuch, not today’s version of David Souter.

    harkin (b63958) — 6/27/2018 @ 4:51 pm

    The selection of Souter effectively gave us Sotomayor as well. Is there a dumber pick by a Republican president, ever?

    random viking (6a54c2)

  200. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) will be a yes on confirmation

    A very dour-looking Chris Matthews acknowledged that there are between two and eight Democrat Senators in red states who will vote “aye” on a SC nominee, so we likely won’t need 100% of the GOP Senators in support.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  201. When does Ruth Bader Ginsburg get fitted for her Captain Pike wheelchair?

    One light=I vote with Sotomayor.

    Two lights=I’m a nasty woman.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  202. “Is there a dumber pick by a Republican president, ever?”

    random viking (6a54c2) — 6/27/2018 @ 5:09 pm

    Yes. President George H.W. Bush’s choice of entrees for the State dinner during his January ‘92 visit to Japan.

    Wait… did you mean pick for SCOTUS?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  203. https://www.dday-overlord.com/en/material/warships/hnoms-svenner

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNoMS_Svenner_(G03)

    I don’t normally like relying on Wikipedia.

    But my original link doesn’t seem to be working.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  204. (I misremembered, in #201. She was at Columbia, not NYU.)

    Beldar (169151)

  205. “The Republican senate stopped Garland, not Trump.”

    True – and Trump nominated Gorsuch, not today’s version of David Souter.

    harkin (b63958) — 6/27/2018 @ 4:51 pm

    They’ve done their level best to stop both.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  206. Well he was listening to Rudman and Sununu,

    Narciso (01c02f)

  207. (I misremembered, in #201. She was at Columbia, not NYU.)

    Beldar (169151) — 6/27/2018 @ 5:17 pm

    Yeah, nobody remembers seeing her OR Obama at Columbia.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  208. Oh, Captain, sir, don’t overlook Maryanne Trump Barry. Forget any conflicts of interest, they don’t bother you anyway… make sis happy and put her on the consideration list for show!

    She’s only 81 and it’ll look good in her obit.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  209. Earl Warren & John Paul Stevens were both worse picks by GOP presidents than Souter, and vastly more consequential. That’s not to defend the Souter pick. But he was a lightweight justice who consistently punched under his very slight weight.

    Beldar (169151)

  210. I want the Sykes lady to join the court and refuse to wear the ridiculous dust ruffle around her neck.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  211. The selection of Souter effectively gave us Sotomayor as well. Is there a dumber pick by a Republican president, ever?

    Nothing wrong with the pick.

    Souter started out voting like Scalia, and slid left after several years on the court.

    Dave (445e97)

  212. The French remember her.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  213. They have a memorial. If you visit Normandy you can see it.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  214. Liberal overwrought overreaction of the day.

    Literally in tears. Haven’t felt this hopeless in a long time. With Justice Kennedy leaving, we now have two options as Americans: get fitted for your Nazi uniform or report directly to your death camp. How do you fight the darkness without light? My spark is going out. #SCOTUS

    Along with screaming at political opponents in restaurants, this is why liberals lose.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  215. @206. Same day our Captain nominates Samuel T. Cogley to the SCOTUS, PP.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  216. The selection of Souter effectively gave us Sotomayor as well. Is there a dumber pick by a Republican president, ever?

    Ladies and gentlemen, I submit Justice John Paul Stevens, appointed by Gerald Ford.

    JVW (42615e)

  217. Souter had spent seven years on the New Hampshire Supreme Court, followed by only a few months on the First Circuit. He therefore suffered from the flaw I mentioned above: His record didn’t include much writing on issues of federal law or, especially, federal constitutional law. He was chosen for that reason, in reaction to the difficulties with the Bork nomination, on the theory that he was a “stealth” candidate. That was always a dumb theory. Poppy trusted his chief of staff, John Sununu, and especially on this kind of issue, shouldn’t have.

    Beldar (169151)

  218. Trump riffing in Fargo…

    Cites Cecil B. DeMille and much, much more…

    Darn tootin’!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  219. Earl Warren & John Paul Stevens were both worse picks by GOP presidents than Souter, and vastly more consequential.

    Don’t forget Harry Blackmun, appointed by Nixon, who wrote the majority opinion in Roe.

    Dave (445e97)

  220. Besides her age (60), Judge Diane Sykes suffers from the disadvantage of being the ex-wife of, and still being friends and sharing children with, Milwaukee talk-radio host Charlie Sykes, who royally PO’d Trump in a very cutting radio interview during the primaries and has since been a prominent Never-Trump voice. That may diminish her chances in the same way that Judge Bill Pryor’s relationship with Jeff Sessions may diminish his.

    Beldar (169151)

  221. Yes but this was necessary because Kennedy and Leahy had destroyed Bork that was podesta first rodeo, then they went after ginsburg, hence no paper trail,

    Narciso (01c02f)

  222. Souter always seemed a bit of a cipher to me. There really wasn’t a lot to go on when he was nominated. It was basically a “trust me” nomination from GHW Bush, and we can blame Sununu for pushing Souter into Bush’s final picks.

    Paul Montagu (00b59c)

  223. 206. Same day our Captain nominates Samuel T. Cogley to the SCOTUS, PP.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 6/27/2018 @ 5:25 pm

    Is that the guy with the Way Way Back Machine?

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  224. Souter had spent seven years on the New Hampshire Supreme Court, followed by only a few months on the First Circuit. He therefore suffered from the flaw I mentioned above: His record didn’t include much writing on issues of federal law or, especially, federal constitutional law. He was chosen for that reason, in reaction to the difficulties with the Bork nomination, on the theory that he was a “stealth” candidate. That was always a dumb theory. Poppy trusted his chief of staff, John Sununu, and especially on this kind of issue, shouldn’t have.

    Perhaps, but I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that Souter was a closet liberal when appointed.

    According to Wikipedia, Blackmun had a voluminous federal record, authoring over 200 opinions while on the Eight Circuit, and likewise started out voting conservative as a Supreme, but underwent a similar transformation into one of the most liberal justices.

    Dave (445e97)

  225. I don’t know of a better FU than to nominate a neverTrumper’s ex-wife to the court. Friends or not.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  226. OK, how about a sassy black lady judge to better reflect American daytime TV?

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  227. Anyone doubting Beldar’s assessment of DJT’s (lack of understanding) as to the Judiciary needs to check out his riff tonight in Fargo about Justice Kennedy. Watch his mental reaching as he struggles to be precise in any way. It is beyond obvious.

    Thank goodness, AND Ted, that somehow he fell into nominating great people. It is on us to keep praising him and feeding his ego regarding nominations.

    Regardless the reasons, the man is getting it VERY right.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  228. 230.I don’t know of a better FU than to nominate a neverTrumper’s ex-wife to the court. Friends or not.

    Of course you do: Michael Cohen, friends or not, PP.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  229. Perhaps, but I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that Souter was a closet liberal when appointed.

    Irony is not dead.

    Kevin M (c09393)

  230. @228. Is that the guy with the Way Way Back Machine?

    No. Books, PP. And he reads them, too. Trump was so impressed!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  231. Souter started out voting like Scalia, and slid left after several years on the court.

    Souter resigned for no good reason during a Democrat’s term. I betcha RBG doesn’t go willingly before 2021.

    Kevin M (c09393)

  232. Irony is not dead.

    Neither are facts.

    In Souter’s first year, he voted with Scalia 85% of the time, and Kennedy/O’Connor 97% of the time.

    Dave (445e97)

  233. There was no evidence that Tom Cruise was a closet stuntman when he first appeared in All the Right Moves.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  234. Closeted rather FWIW.

    Pinandpuller (eda6bf)

  235. The irony is that you cannot spot a kindred spirit. Your libdar is broken.

    Kevin M (c09393)

  236. Trump proclaims he’s ‘the most powerful, most popular Republican in the history of the party!’

    Eat it, Abe!

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  237. Cham v. Attorney General, 445 F.3d 683 (3d Cir. 2006)(Maryanne Trump Barry, J.), is a fascinating and extremely unusual case about the due process rights due to alien applicants for asylum in the United States, and I commend it to the reading of anyone curious about what kind of Judge Trump’s sister is.

    Given the choice of voting between her and him, for anything, I’d vote for her in the proverbial New York minute. But it’s hard to imagine that the person who wrote the “no due process” tweets over the weekend came out of the same household that she did, much less the same womb.

    Beldar (169151)

  238. The Maryanne answer was to a how he wasn’t some knuckle dragging Neanderthal that his uncle was a,nuclear physicist who worked with tesla would have made heads,explode.

    Narciso (01c02f)

  239. @ Dave, who wrote (#229), in part:

    … I haven’t seen any convincing evidence that Souter was a closet liberal when appointed.

    No, neither have I, and neither did the vetting team, one presumes, because there was a team and he was supposedly vetted.

    My point is that because he lacked a multi-year track record of voting on cases involving federal law, especially federal constitutional law, it was impossible to properly vet him; whereas by contrast, a potential nominee with a half-dozen years on any federal appellate court will have a wealth of examples that correspond quite closely to the same sorts of issues that would be before the SCOTUS.

    I also agree with you that he started off unexceptionally before drifting. See my remark above re him being a light-weight. The liberal justices very shrewdly flattered him. At conference, on each case, the senior judge in what appears to the be “affirm/reverse” majority assigns the responsibility/opportunity for drafting the proposed majority opinion among the various judges making up that majority. Thus, someone like Stevens (universally regarded as charming, gregarious, and persuasive) could frequently could frequently butter up Souter by assigning him drafting responsibility on the cases he was most passionately convinced about. And over time, Souter became passionately convinced, increasingly, on the liberal side of a ton of issues, including the death penalty and criminal procedures issues. He didn’t just drift, in other words, but was deliberately and successfully drawn.

    Beldar (169151)

  240. Despite Roe, Blackmun isn’t categorized with Souter or Stevens or Warren in terms of “drift.” And most scholars I’ve read attribute Blackmun’s authorship of Roe not to innate liberalism, but rather to his judgment-wrecking bias connected to and arising from his longtime representation of the Mayo Clinic in private practice: He viewed the entire issue as one of the state interfering in the doctor-patient relationship, overlain with some Biblical stuff about “quickening” and viability that the libs held their noses in signing onto in Roe, knowing they were taking that all away through the “mental health” exception snuck into Doe v. Bolton, the companion case to Roe, announced on the same day. Blackmun and CJ Warren Burger were known as the “Minnesota Twins” because of their common origin and tendency to mirror each others’ votes; their relationship was actually more complicated, but Blackmun was a reasonably reliable conservative vote, except on abortion and maybe a couple of other issues. (Every justice has some area in which they’re unpredictable — even Alito.)

    Beldar (169151)

  241. Trump’s in Fargo, North Dakota and now wrapping up before a wildly enthusiastic audience that filled the 9,000 capacity venue and spilled outside (estimated at over 10,000).

    ropelight (7bb9e5)

  242. Eat it, Abe

    Even if you limit the popularity by excluding those who lived in the CSA, Lincoln was not very popular. He won re-election because the army voted for him and because the Union started to win major battles just in time to make the peace Democrats and McClellan start to lose their own popularity. We actual came close to President McClellan negotiating a treaty that recognized Confederate independence or one that permanently and overtly enshrined slavery in the Constitution in exchange for the CSA re-entering the Union.

    Most popular GOP President would probably be Ike or Reagan.

    kishnevi (378575)

  243. If Trump would outsource the rest of his presidency to people as competent as those who came up with the names I recognize from the list, I’d be perfectly happy for him to have a military parade every Monday, a Medal of Honor presentation every Tuesday, a campaign rally every Thursday, and the rest of the week off for golf and bimbos.

    Beldar (169151)

  244. @244 Beldar I believe the term of art is “groomed.”

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  245. Sexton speculates that the Dems may be able to delay Trump’s pick by preventing a quorum in the Senate. The tactic depends on McCain not being present, no Dems showing up, and Pence not counting as a member for purposes of a quorum count.

    https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/27/heres-democrats-block-vote-trumps-scotus-nominee/

    That only gets them to January, unless the Senate stays the same after the election.

    Anon Y. Mous (6cc438)

  246. @ Ed from SFV: Yeah, that’ll work too. Souter was certainly well-groomed, mostly by the guy with the bow ties.

    Beldar (169151)

  247. MOVING to the new post with SCOTUS comments!

    Beldar (169151)

  248. @247. Ahhhh, but our Captain is boasting in 2018 and ol’Abe has a better shine to his penny now than then. Be glad got C.B. DeMille’s name right and didn’t reference the ‘Tallahassee Trail’ again tonight. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  249. If Ginsberg expires, I think the biggest FU Trump could give the left would be to nominate Cruz as her replacement… although I think she is going senile now, I expect her law clerks to continue writing her decisions until she is long past mummified

    steveg (a9dcab)

  250. https://mobile.twitter.com/Jeffrey03035719/status/1011430268551487499
    (I use my real name among the Twitterati)

    kishnevi (378575)

  251. 225 Beldar are you trying to set Trump up for impeachment based on age discrimination?

    Nate Ogden (223c65)

  252. Trump’s in Fargo, North Dakota and now wrapping up before a wildly enthusiastic audience that filled the 9,000 capacity venue and spilled outside (estimated at over 10,000).

    ropelight (7bb9e5) — 6/27/2018 @ 6:29 pm

    ,
    Holy blankety blank! You can actually get 10000 people together in North Dakota! I guess I don’t know much about North Dakota. I know in the summer you constantly have to move your tools as the sun moves into the shade because you will blister your hands. And in winter, of course you need two sets of gloves.

    What do you do in Wyoming during the summer? If it falls on the weekend you hold a BBQ.

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  253. If Ginsberg expires, I think the biggest FU Trump could give the left would be to nominate Cruz as her replacement… although I think she is going senile now, I expect her law clerks to continue writing her decisions until she is long past mummified
    steveg (a9dcab) — 6/27/2018 @ 7:23 pm

    Someone opined that Ginsberg would never retire while a Republican was in the WH. And my first reaction was she may not be able to exercise that option. She’s, what, 120?

    Steve57 (0b1dac)

  254. Lists…

    From USA Today, a month before the election, here is the list of Republicans who [were] not supporting Trump.

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/10/08

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  255. “…do I get my money back?”
    File a suit and find out.

    askeptic (8d10f9)

  256. Yes, you can have your dues back as soon as you return all of the benefits and wage increases brought about by union negotiations. It’s a good deal, really.

    Roger Charles P (a8ea20)

  257. sleazy fbi kingpin Chris Wray says when his hot and horny fbi boys and girls do adultery all up in it that’s not necessarily what he would call a “problemo”

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  258. Someone opined that Ginsberg would never retire while a Republican was in the WH. And in winter, of course you need two sets of gloves.

    run 3 (696c9b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6160 secs.