-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
-
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Justice Kennedy to Retire this Summer, according to Republican Senator (NYDailyNews article)
- Thread starter Squire
- Start date
True, but she's smart as hell and she'd shake that place up like a cocktail shaker. Plus, 67 or not she's hot
![[rockon]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/020.gif "Rockon [rockon]")
tuna
NES Member
I keep thinking of the scene in Braveheart where Longshanks wants Wallace, "Alive if possible, dead, just as good"
Garys
NES Member
Apparently they forgot the pressure on RBG to retire while Obama was still in office and could appoint a younger female ideologue as part of his legacy. That was before Justice Scalia died, so I think goes back to 2015 or so.
He was pro 2a on DC v Heller. So if your one track minded Kennedy's retirement is a wash not a gain. He leans left in other issues so we may see a small gain to the right with a trump pick but time will tell.
We need the old hag rbg to f***ing die already and Trump can get a hat trick.
He was pro-2A on Heller and refused to take up any 2A cases after McDonald except Caetano. His replacement may make a huge difference for 2A.
tuna
NES Member
Whoever they date.
But not the rest of us, I agree.
I agree that the fix was in, and they wanted her replacement to be part of Hillary's legacy. I wonder how much Trump would have won by if the Democrats hadn't cheated.
Horrible
NES Member
Not sure who Trump is going to nominate, but this is going to be tough on a few Dems up for re-election in red states:
President Trump Forcing Red State Democrats to Oppose Pro-Gun Justice in Election Year | Breitbart President Trump Forcing Red State Democrats to Oppose Pro-Gun Justice in Election Year
President Trump Forcing Red State Democrats to Oppose Pro-Gun Justice in Election Year | Breitbart President Trump Forcing Red State Democrats to Oppose Pro-Gun Justice in Election Year
Horrible
NES Member
Despite the headline, the article admits just that.
Now RBG has to stay on even if "Weekend at Bernie's" hoping for Trump to lose in 2020.
Otherwise, the court could be 6-3 pretty soon!
cockpitbob
NES Member
That article was interesting, but only in that the libtard Seattle news paper made all sorts of claims but had zero sources and made no statements or claims that could be verified. I kept reading looking for something verifiable but didn't find any. Seattle... More #Fakenews.
Lip
Army Veteran
Yeah a lot of people whined about andrew jackson. Hes shaking up the RNC, and the libiots. Is he the libertarian hero, no? But he's no Barney o rapy, no Killery, or too tall devalue. Nor is he a mitt, or a bush tard.
6-3 wouldn't be a good thing IMO. There's sometimes pro-freedom/libertarian 1st/4th/5th amendment 5-4 decisions where one of the conservatives sides with the liberals. And it would be a bad thing if the court gets wildly out of step with the democratic branches; that's where you start risking court packing or other radical steps if the left sweeps an election.
Horrible
NES Member
The left already did this (packing the lower courts). It’s a guarantee that they will take radical steps to “fundamentally change America” when they come into power again whether the court be 5-4, 6-3, or 9-0 when they take power again.
SCOTUS needs to follow the damn COTUS. We should have 9 “originalists” on the court. All of this twisting the law and logic into a pretzel to justify some crap that Congress pushes out out their a$$es has to stop.
amm5061
NES Member
So she personally benefited from a supreme court case heard a decade before she was born? As in she was forced to go to a segregated school before she was even born?
Anyone else also notice that the Left is pushing to re-segregate schools again?
I honestly wouldn't put it past them to Weekend at Bernie's her corpse if she dies. She already sleeps through just about everything. Sunglasses on her and prop her up in her chair and no one would ever know.
namedpipes
NES Member
If by segregate, you mean communities that have schools where whites (or Christians, etc) are sent to the White school and blacks (Muslims, or whatever) are sent to the Black school, that was an absurdly racist policy.
If by segregate, you mean communities that generally have kids attend the nearest school, and that happens to result in a concentration of whites at one and blacks at another, that's just geography.
"Bussing" was a horrible idea.
namedpipes
NES Member
QFTMFT
If you mean that there is a high percentage of Democratic appointees right now, it's a common misconception that this is unusual. After one party has had the presidency for 8 years, it's always the case that that party has a high percentage of appointees, and it balances out over the course of the other party's term, then tips in the other direction.
What court-packing means is enlarging the size of a court so the party in power can fill the newly created seats with their own appointees, and so tip the balance of power in their favor. The last president to consider it was FDR.
amm5061
NES Member
namedpipes
NES Member
Did not think anyone today would pull that.
Birds of a (whatever type of) feather tend to flock together in their free time, but that goes a bit beyond...
My town is big enough there are several schools and each has a slightly different "mission". It results in some self selecting segregation but it's more like the "percentages" vary a little per school, not school A is black, B is white and C is hispanic. Oh, they're white too, now, according to the libs... Guess we only need two schools...
