YMMV. As I've said, I disagree with a lot of what Trump does, but keeping the leftists from controlling SCOTUS is one of my highest political desires, and Trump will (probably) ensure that doesn't happen.
As much as I think abortion is basically murder (hi matthunter), I don't want it repealed until the country is ready for it. That means the vast majority are willing to recognize fetuses as people just as much as they do newborns, that means a culture of nurturing and supporting all those children born to mothers who don't want them, or can't support them on their own. So yeah, "both" ends of the current political spectrum have some work to do. We all do.
Fetuses are people. Just like pencil roughs are the painting. And batter is the cake. And egg salad is chicken.
I said it during the election, he’s probably going to a chance to nominate three, maybe four justices and there were rumors Kennedy was holding out to see who won. I guess he can’t hold out any longer. I’m happy with Gorsuxh. I doubt Clinton would have picked him and I’d hate to see who else she’d nominate.
If we could get Thomas to retire and just one of the liberals to shuffle off, there'd be a conservative lock on the court for a generation.
Expected this one. Fetuses are, scientifically speaking, as developmentally sentient as prawns. Now I don't like the idea of abortion - those prawns can, with sauce, become a wonderful cocktail or curry. But I'm not going to force someone to give birth in the face of rape or serious medical or psychological trauma (either to them or the kid), because you think a prawn trumps Mom, or the kid that grows from the prawn should suffer a life of looking like an inside-out intestine because Gawd. Nor am I forcing anyone to decide otherwise. Your "accept all births" is good on its face, but what if the kid would be born WITHOUT a face? This is about souls, let's boil it down. You can't prove they exist, so we have to draw the line at what makes humans unique - self awareness. Mom is. Fetus ain't.
And then you could kill ALL the niggers BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!! No? Don't wanna do that? Hmm. Apart from the gun thing, which we've already established gets you hard (if you can call it that), what exactly is so heinous about Dem policy you feel this is needed to protect you? Or, conversely, what shit do you wanna pull that you think you're gonna need a stacked Supreme Court to manage, and why would you need it it it's so necessary?
While I'd very much like to see a younger set on the court -- for years I've been complaining that both dissents and judgements have had logical flaws that read like senility -- Trump is the last person I want picking appointees. He's not curious, and either he'll pick someone he's heard of before -- maybe Roy Moore -- or he'll pick whoever he's told to, apparently from this list: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/27/anthony-kennedy-replacements-supreme-court-trump-679941 The hell does Trump know about any of them? Whoever gets the nomination is whomever's advocate talks to him last. Some of these don't sound terrible, but is he going to put an ounce of thought into the process? No, he isn't.
If you got rid of Thomas, RBG might retire. She's on record as saying she's not going anywhere as long as Thomas is on the bench. "Balance, Daniel-san."
So fucking move, then. Even Volpone for all his gay screaming and perpetural bitchiness finally got off his lazy ass and moved to an area that he hates less likes. But you won't do that be ause you love the money you can make working in CA, while whining about traffic is so hard, waaaaah The bullet train was always supposed to be SF to LA. You conveniently forget how many in Central California kept pushing to add stops in bumfuck towns like Gilroy that no one is trying to get to and that is what has slowed this project. Nice try, though. And if you think this won't trickle down to "important" things like housing and medical care, you're naive. No one cared about the cake. It's everything else that could happen.
Nothing, other than that he's getting up in years. I'd like someone with a similar ideological bent but 20-30 years younger to take his place.
Yes, but Supreme Court justice is a job for life. I'd rather it be someone with 30-40 more years of life then someone with 10-20. If you could replace RBG on the court with someone of the exact same judicial philosophy but 40 years younger, wouldn't you?
Pretty much nobody on here likes you Bigot Boy, but you still keep coming back! I don't see why Tuttle can't choose his own reasons for posting.
Your country should follow the example of the inferior, partisan (according to Zombie and Dinner) English courts and have a retirement age of 75. Being able to sit until death is not only ridiculous, it also promotes staleness in terms of opinion.
I'm sure Trump will keep the seat open so that the American people can decide through the 2018 Senate elections how to fill the seat.
It is partisan. It's only brought up when the It has always been partisan every time it's brought up, because it's only ever brought up when the old justices don't match the the current President.
