Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia dead at 79

[WildBillKelso]

Firstly, Rest in peace to an unyielding defender of the constitution. Thoughts to his family to find comfort from their loss.

Secondly, this makes this presidential election all the more important. Louisiana will probably vote republican. It is in the swing states that the resources need to be spent. We are up against people like Bloomberg and his billions.
Obama already stuffed most of the fed. circuit courts with anti-gun judges. A SC judge appointed by him might not be avoided. The next president and maybe the one after needs to be pro 2A or the fight is lost for most of the rest of our lives.

 

[Whitebread]

Sounds like the senate will need to stay "in session" until election day. I would just about bet money they recess for easter or the fourth of july or something and the leadership will be "shocked" that the president would make a recess appointment. In other words they will let him have his way but make it look like they fought him and lost.

 

[Emperor]

I can think of four SC Justices that should have died before this one!

Whatever happens, this nation must follow the Constitution in this issue. Even if it means that the Dumbass gets to pick. The Dumbass is the biggest affront to the Constitution, but we cannot let these politicians re-write it. Now if there are procedural rules that can be used to stall this appointment, then I'm okay with that.

As it stands now, in a deadlocked SC, all lower court rulings stand. So the Dumbass is behind on a few of them. It behooves him to get someone, unfortunately!

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Ginsburg dies before January too! I doubt she is competent now anyway.

 

[Whitebread]

I can think of four SC Justices that should have died before this one!

Whatever happens, this nation must follow the Constitution in this issue. Even if it means that the Dumbass gets to pick. The Dumbass is the biggest affront to the Constitution, but we cannot let these politicians re-write it. Now if there are procedural rules that can be used to stall this appointment, then I'm okay with that.

As it stands now, in a deadlocked SC, all lower court rulings stand. So the Dumbass is behind on a few of them. It behooves him to get someone, unfortunately!

I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Ginsburg dies before January too! I doubt she is competent now anyway.

Full disclosure I haven't studied this in depth, but its my understanding that the president get to nominate but the senate has control of the appointment except when they are at recess. So the senate can tell the douche in chief to go eff himself all year long. I fear they will buy into that media bull that the people just want the polititians to get along and they wont be an "obstruction" if the president pushes the issue. I fully expect them to go into recess so their hands will be clean. And nearly no one will cover it. And nearly no one will call them out on it. They will come back from vacation and politically grand-stand about the president pulling a dirty trick on them to save face.

 

[Rhandhali]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...da-is-being-vetted-for-supreme-court-vacancy/

So Brian Sandoval is being batted about as the only deadlock proof nominee and is part of the vetting process. He got the NRA endorsement in his last election and has a good record of shutting down things like universal background checks.

Doubt he'll be the nominee but you'd have to be crazy not to confirm him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whitebread]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...da-is-being-vetted-for-supreme-court-vacancy/

So Brian Sandoval is being batted about as the only deadlock proof nominee and is part of the vetting process. He got the NRA endorsement in his last election and has a good record of shutting down things like universal background checks.

Doubt he'll be the nominee but you'd have to be crazy not to confirm him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If he gets nominated by an Obama Whitehouse, I may die of shock.

 

[Rhandhali]

If he gets nominated by an Obama Whitehouse, I may die of shock.

Well, if you want someone who WILL be confirmed then he's a good choice. Republicans are going to take a beating in the media no matter what, might as well get something out of it.

It's not all gloom and doom, there is still the election and of the justices Ginsberg has already had 2 kinds of cancer, heart stent, and she's 82 years old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whitebread]

Well, if you want someone who WILL be confirmed then he's a good choice. Republicans are going to take a beating in the media no matter what, might as well get something out of it.

It's not all gloom and doom, there is still the election and of the justices Ginsberg has already had 2 kinds of cancer, heart stent, and she's 82 years old.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree they will take a beating either way, they may as well "die on their feet" like they have a set.

 

[Rhandhali]

I agree they will take a beating either way, they may as well "die on their feet" like they have a set.

If an acceptable nominee comes up there's nothing to be gained by standing ground. Sure it's a another nominee from a terrible democratic president, but I'd be fine with someone like Sandoval. It'd be stupid to oppose someone who has an NRA endorsement and a gun record like his.

Sure, the Republicans will look bad going back on their statements but we gain a perfectly acceptable justice that's insurance against an election loss. Eat the words and move onto the next fight. You can make up for flip flopping or whatever by selling it as bipartisan cooperation, reaching across the aisle etc. Look how well the republicans play with others by working with the president to fulfill a critical vacancy. There's pretty much no downside to confirming an appeasement candidate, at least no permanent downside.

Decline and you still have the risk of an election loss, changes in party control and an ongoing slugfest in congress and the media with nothing to show for it. Nobody looks good blocking the highway, no matter what their cause. You just **** people offThere is also a high chance of a second vacancy in the next four years which will just make things worse.

Obviously any unacceptable candidate should be rejected outright. But if by some miracle someone like Sandoval is presented for confirmation it's better to look bad and have a good Justice than to have an extended vacancy or a raging leftist get the post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Whitebread]

If an acceptable nominee comes up there's nothing to be gained by standing ground. Sure it's a another nominee from a terrible democratic president, but I'd be fine with someone like Sandoval. It'd be stupid to oppose someone who has an NRA endorsement and a gun record like his.

Sure, the Republicans will look bad going back on their statements but we gain a perfectly acceptable justice that's insurance against an election loss. Eat the words and move onto the next fight. You can make up for flip flopping or whatever by selling it as bipartisan cooperation, reaching across the aisle etc. Look how well the republicans play with others by working with the president to fulfill a critical vacancy. There's pretty much no downside to confirming an appeasement candidate, at least no permanent downside.

Decline and you still have the risk of an election loss, changes in party control and an ongoing slugfest in congress and the media with nothing to show for it. Nobody looks good blocking the highway, no matter what their cause. You just **** people offThere is also a high chance of a second vacancy in the next four years which will just make things worse.

Obviously any unacceptable candidate should be rejected outright. But if by some miracle someone like Sandoval is presented for confirmation it's better to look bad and have a good Justice than to have an extended vacancy or a raging leftist get the post.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again I cant disagree, but there is little to no chance that a good judge will get nominated. Truthfully if Obama nominated a good judge it would be the ultimate way to get back a the republicans. They refuse to stand on weather or not a judge is qualified but the fact that lame ducks shouldn't nominate. So if a good judge gets put up for consideration they have the choice between screwing the people or looking like dirtbags. Either way on the off chance Obama nominates a judge instead of a lib-tard activist congress is screwed. Heres hoping that congress gets screwed.

The simple solution would have been for them to not act like a bunch a wussies the last two times. If they stood on the fact that the last two were moonbat lib-tards and block their appiintments we would all be better off.

 

[Rhandhali]

http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/432716/moderates-are-not-so-moderate-merrick-garland

Well the new nominee is Merrick Garland whose 2nd amendment credentials are stellar from the confiscationalist point of view. Every reason to block this nomination now.

 

[Keepurpowderdry]

Donated to GOA and contacted my Senators ! No, anti-gunner anti Bill of Rights Nominee!

 

[PPBart]

Copied from a friend's post:

"A lot of people have brought up the fact that they won't vote for Trump if he's the eventual nominee. I just want to put something in perspective.

Justice Scalia's seat is vacant. Ginsberg is 82 years old, Kennedy is 79, Breyer is 77, and Thomas is 67. Nowadays, the data shows that the average age of a Supreme Court retirement or death occurs after 75.
These are 5 vacancies that will likely come up over the next 4-8 years. The next President will have the power to potentially create a 7-2 Supreme Court skewed in their ideology. Think about that... 7-2. If the next President appoints 5 young justices, it will guarantee control of the Supreme Court for an entire generation. And 7-2 decisions will hold up much more over time than 5-4 decisions which are seemed to be lacking in mandate.

Hillary has made it clear she will use the Supreme Court to go after the 2nd Amendment. She has literally said that the Supreme Court was wrong in its Heller decision stating that the Court should overturn and remove the individual right to keep and bear arms. Period.

Everyone saying that they won't vote for one candidate or the other if they are the GOP nominee, please realize this. If Hillary Clinton wins and gets to make these appointments, you likely will never see another Conservative victory at the Supreme Court level for the rest of your life. Ever."

 

[Saintsfan6]

Copied from a friend's post:

"A lot of people have brought up the fact that they won't vote for Trump if he's the eventual nominee. I just want to put something in perspective.

Justice Scalia's seat is vacant. Ginsberg is 82 years old, Kennedy is 79, Breyer is 77, and Thomas is 67. Nowadays, the data shows that the average age of a Supreme Court retirement or death occurs after 75.
These are 5 vacancies that will likely come up over the next 4-8 years. The next President will have the power to potentially create a 7-2 Supreme Court skewed in their ideology. Think about that... 7-2. If the next President appoints 5 young justices, it will guarantee control of the Supreme Court for an entire generation. And 7-2 decisions will hold up much more over time than 5-4 decisions which are seemed to be lacking in mandate.

Hillary has made it clear she will use the Supreme Court to go after the 2nd Amendment. She has literally said that the Supreme Court was wrong in its Heller decision stating that the Court should overturn and remove the individual right to keep and bear arms. Period.

Everyone saying that they won't vote for one candidate or the other if they are the GOP nominee, please realize this. If Hillary Clinton wins and gets to make these appointments, you likely will never see another Conservative victory at the Supreme Court level for the rest of your life. Ever."

Very well said. These facts seem to escape those who refuse to vote when their candidate doesn't get the nomination. I don't know what kind of president Trump would make, I don't know what impact he will have after 4 years in office. What I do know is what kind of president Hillary or Sanders would be, and I can't stay home and let that happen in good conscious.

 

[Rhandhali]

Anyone who owns a gun and doesn't vote for the Republicans is insane. I don't care for the guy, but odds are he'll be the one with an R by his name. I honestly see him as the only chance to prevent the democrats from sweeping the presidential election unless Sanders runs 3rd party (he should).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[velociraptor]

If given a choice between voting for a dead mule for POTUS or hillary/bernie (or JBE for governor) I will vote for the dead mule every time.

Seriously this election is too important to allow hillary or bernie to win. Trump is by no means anyone I like and I do not trust him.

That said I absolutely trust hillary/bernie/JBE to leave us with our pants around our ankles and screw us all. I trust them to urinate and defecate all over the US Constitution.


So yes Trump is by no means ideal but if that is the one who will beat hillary/bernie then Trump gets my vote.

Hopefully Cruz will get the nod but if not I will vote for the dead mule.


Hillary and Bernie will take your firearms, your money and your freedom. They have said that is what they plan to do.

 

[Rhandhali]

If given a choice between voting for a dead mule for POTUS or hillary/bernie (or JBE for governor) I will vote for the dead mule every time.

Seriously this election is too important to allow hillary or bernie to win. Trump is by no means anyone I like and I do not trust him.

That said I absolutely trust hillary/bernie/JBE to leave us with our pants around our ankles and screw us all. I trust them to urinate and defecate all over the US Constitution.


So yes Trump is by no means ideal but if that is the one who will beat hillary/bernie then Trump gets my vote.

Hopefully Cruz will get the nod but if not I will vote for the dead mule.


Hillary and Bernie will take your firearms, your money and your freedom. They have said that is what they plan to do.

Look on the bright side, if Sanders loses out on the nominations maybe that may mean his supporters, which amount to a substantial amount of the democrats, will stay home in a fit of pique.

 

[Vermiform]

Look on the bright side, if Sanders loses out on the nominations maybe that may mean his supporters, which amount to a substantial amount of the democrats, will stay home in a fit of pique.

Hilary will win the nomination. Bernie will throw his support behind her and possibly join the ticket. Even without him on the ticket, she will be unbeatable by the The Donald when the media gets through with him.

Dark days ahead, plan accordingly.......

 

[Saintsfan6]

Hilary will win the nomination. Bernie will throw his support behind her and possibly join the ticket. Even without him on the ticket, she will be unbeatable by the The Donald when the media gets through with him.

Dark days ahead, plan accordingly.......

Sadly I think you are correct. The media and liberals have a stockpile of dirt for him once he wins the nomination. While he may handle the criticism well, many republican supporters can be swayed by things that don't jive with their moral code (think JBE vs Vitter). Democrats know how to unite after nominations have been made, republicans do not. Hillary wins this one IMO no matter who she goes up against.

 

[velociraptor]

Hillary may still be indicated for her clear criminal handling of top secret emails. Anyone else would have so there may a chance there.

It is not over until it is over but yes everyone not just the GOP needs to pull together on this one.

I too am concerned we will have another JBE type election. I will vote for anyone who is not hillary/sanders.

DeadMule for POTUS will get my vote if that is the B choice.