Law Scalia Died today

JDragon said:
Supreme Court nominations should always be people who are in the middle or as apolitical as possible.
Click to expand...

Our 2 sides are more at war than they are interested in running the country well.

One side didn't trust the other to play fair in positions like this, so they don't play fair. And there's really no way to de-escalate at this point.
 
Quipling said:
No, they should be people as qualified as possible. Ginsburg was undeniably political due to her ACLU background, but is generally thought to be one of the finest legal minds of the generation.
Click to expand...

There are always enough qualified people. At least more than one. My (clumsily made) point was that it is very unfortunate that the SC gets politized. There are judges on both extremes of the political spectrum where you have to wonder whether they arrive at their conclusions due to legal considerations or whether they have an a priori opinion they justify post hoc. Having 'balanced' or apolitical judges (who have to be qualified, but that is a necessary condition) may alleviate that issue.
 
This is a all hands on deck moment for the GOP. I have a dream and that is to go to the Supreme Court and win. I have 5 federal appeals that have a decent chance. If a Dem gets appointed I might go but I certainly will not win.
 
Greoric said:
1 in 25 really. His comments reek of classic sociopathy.
Click to expand...
He's just fucking intense and doesn't ever seem to want to give an inch when it comes to politics and religion. If Dawkins croaks from his stroke we'll probably see some sadness from Buk.
 
ncordless said:
Every 5-4 conservative decision this term is now 4-4. Lol. Only thing on their agenda that remains possible is Fisher.

Mandatory union dues live to fight another day.
Click to expand...

If a tie, the lower courts ruling is upheld I believe.
 
@Quipling : perhaps you should update your thread title to something more formal, like the news headline above.
 
Almost agreed with Buk for a moment, should have known it was another religion rant.
 
Bukowski82 said:
Tell us more, Professor.
Click to expand...

Well you expressed your desire and pleasure watching someone die because they disagree with your political stance. That's pretty pathological. Conveniently, it fits in well with your overall persuasion I've seen on here to organize society by way of trampling individual rights.
 
Diamond Jim said:
The next president Marco? We have a president. He didn't die. He still has 11 months in office.
Click to expand...

That also doesn't sound like he thinks it's gonna be him.


Also he didn't write that anyway
 
Diamond Jim said:
The next president Marco? We have a president. He didn't die. He still has 11 months in office.
Click to expand...

...I don't think it works be very good for his party to stretch out the appointment for the next 341 days.
 
I think it's complete bullshit that conservatives are saying the next president should appoint the next justice. The people spoke loudly and clearly in 08/12 about who they wanted making those decisions, and if a conservative president were sitting they almost certainly wouldn't be saying this.
 
Kafir-kun said:
He's just fucking intense and doesn't ever seem to want to give an inch when it comes to politics and religion. If Dawkins croaks from his stroke we'll probably see some sadness from Buk.
Click to expand...

What's worse is he's allegedly commissioned in the armed forces. With his pathology, I'm sure he'll rise to the top of the CoC, but thank god he's not a soldier or marine, and won't be sending our boys into direct combat engagements so he can pad his own resume. Going from metal coffin to metal coffin on the sea is the right place for that guy.
 
Wow, Scalia is not even cold and the GOP candidates are already putting a political spin on this. Wow.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,651
Messages
58,307,761
Members
175,999
Latest member
joshvegas

Share this page

Back
Top