Obama picks SCOTUS nominee

gftChris

http://secondnexus.com/politics-and-economics/supreme-court-pick-sets-up-showdown-with-gop-senate/?utm_content=inf_10_1164_2&tse_id=INF_30b5a81bb5364bdea6da75f72652acf9

President Barack Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court for the seat held by Justice Antonin Scalia until his sudden death.

Garland is the Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals where he has served since 1997. He is a graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law School.

gftChris

http://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/2016/03/16/president-obama-to-announce-supreme-court-pick-wednesday.html

Clevfan4life

here we go again......FIIIIIGHTTTTIIIINNNNGGG out of the blue corner....

Westside Steve

I just watched a segment featuring judge Napolitano speaking highly of Justice Garland. He says he is no left-wing ideology and that if nominated would be a good choice. Hopefully he is correct and hopefully the Republicans are not just in knee jerk mode. We know Obama can find much much worse candidates and Hillary...

WSS

Clevfan4life

@westside-steve said:
Republicans are not just inknee jerk mode.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH. Sure why not

gftChris

I hope the process takes its course and people just do their job. That doesn't mean appoint whoever is nominated, but go through the process, and if they are acceptable, approve, otherwise decline. If the GOP senators just flat out reject someone immediately, it'll severely dent their chances in the election. Or at least, have some impact.

MLD Woody

Sounds like a very reasonable choice

Westside Steve

Remember that doing their job also means denying a rubber stamp to a candidate that does not meet their approval.

WSS

Clevfan4life

But but......... Oba "mao" is bad

Westside Steve

@clevfan4life said:
But but......... Oba "mao" is bad

And that still true, so?

WSS

gftChris

@westside-steve said:

Remember that doing their job also means denying a rubber stamp to a candidate that does not meet their approval.

WSS

That's literally what I said.

gftChris

Interesting tidbit

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R.-Utah, considered one of the U.S. Senate’s foremost scholars of the Constitution and the Supreme Court, told Newsmax Friday he felt President Obama would nominate a decidedly liberal candidate to succeed the late Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court.

"This [nomination process] is all about the election."

"The President told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him," Hatch told us.

"[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man," he told us, referring to the more centrist chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia who was considered and passed over for the two previous high court vacancies.

Latest News Update

But, Hatch quickly added, "He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants."

Clevfan4life

@westside-steve said:

And that still true, so?

WSS

It was never true. He wasnt great though either. I think he'll be remembered fondly though for finally resetting with cuba.

Clevfan4life

@gftchris said:

Interesting tidbit

Hatch is a partisan hack no more no less

gftChris

@clevfan4life said:
Hatch is a partisan hack no more no less

Sure, and he's saying "hey, he could nominate this guy and we'd love it, but because he's some uber liberal he'll probably appoint Al Sharpton, or maybe even himself" and now he's going to look like a colossal fuckwit if he votes against it.

Westside Steve

@gftchris said:
That's literally what I said.

And I agree. Your point?

WSS

gftChris

@westside-steve said:

And I agree. Your point?

WSS

That you seemed to be trying to point something out I'd missed? Never mind. No point wasting energy on things we agree on

To the point, this is what I have an issue with:

Senator Pat Toomey

‏@SenToomey

Should Merrick Garland be nominated again by the next president, I would be happy to carefully consider his nomination... #SCOTUS

Westside Steve

@gftchris said:

That you seemed to be trying to point something out I'd missed? Never mind. No point wasting energy on things we agree on

To the point, this is what I have an issue with:

Senator Pat Toomey

‏@SenToomey

Should Merrick Garland be nominated again by the next president, I would be happy to carefully consider his nomination... #SCOTUS

I can't help you there, I think they might as well go for it. Then again many of the politicians, it should be on both sides but it isn't, have seen the danger in capitulating too quickly.

Example: conservatives think the budget is out of control. When it comes time to stop the spending they always bend over and vote to extend the debt limit. So how can you trust them?

Toomey is just playing Hardball to impress his base. If he doesn't he will soon have an opponent barking about how he bent over for Obama.

WSS

calfoxwc

he's a nominee that looks the part of a good nominee ...but..

the truth is.. even according to "Thinkprogress"

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/03/16/3760727/who-is-merrick-garland/

"To be clear, Garland's record does not suggest that he would join the Court's right flank if confirmed to the Supreme Court. He would likely vote much more often than not with the Supreme Court's liberals, while occasionally casting a heterodox vote."

AND, Garland is an anti-gun TROJAN HORSE.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/potential-supreme-court-nominee-merrick-garland-tough-on-crime-but-soft-on-guns/

Garland, currently the Chief Judge of the Washington, D.C. Court of Appeals, is viewed by some to be left-leaning on gun control. In a 2007 case, he voted to review a restrictive gun law that had previously been shot down. The law included a requirement for guns to be kept unloaded and disassembled, unless they were being kept at a place of business or were being used for legal recreational activities. Prohibiting people from having functioning guns for defense in their home was a critical issue. A U.S. District Court had ruled against the ban (and for the gun owner). The D.C. Circuit upheld that ruling, but Garland then voted, as part of a request to the court as a whole, for the D.C. Circuit to reconsider their own ruling, otherwise known as a request for en banc review. Garland lost, and the previous decision was upheld. The case, District of Columbia v. Heller, eventually went to the Supreme Court, which ruled the ban unconstitutional. While Garland’s actual decision was only to review the law and not to enforce it outright, the fact that he didn’t just agree to kill the ban may not sit well with conservatives.

calfoxwc

http://www.bustle.com/articles/148207-is-merrick-garland-a-liberal-the-supreme-court-prospects-political-leanings-could-make-him-a-safe

The National Review has called foul on the claim that Garland is a tried and true moderate justice, though. The claim is based off of Garland's record regarding gun control in which the judge voted to pave the way for stricter gun laws in D.C. Garland's decision marked a major turning point in restrictions that would prevent gun ownership for those seeking handguns as protective tools for self-defense.

Given the fact that Obama is looking to making sweeping changes when it comes to gun control, this point may count in Garland's favor.