• 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.

The Merrill Garland Supreme Court Nominee Megathread

Should be fun. I bet he'll nominate someone who appears conservative on the outside, but has a hidden flaw that will happen to come out that will completely prevent him from getting on the court. If the Republicans refuse to proceed with confirmation hearings, they'll appear unreasonable. Once the first guy gets shot down, he will drag out an ideologue who will spend the next 20 years destroying the constitution.
 
With all of the hub-bub surrounding the elections, Bl-Obama probably is feeling left out. So, here we go.

Is it going to be Devalue?

- - - Updated - - -

knfmn said:
Should be fun. I bet he'll nominate someone who appears conservative on the outside, but has a hidden flaw that will happen to come out that will completely prevent him from getting on the court. If the Republicans refuse to proceed with confirmation hearings, they'll appear unreasonable. Once the first guy gets shot down, he will drag out an ideologue who will spend the next 20 years destroying the constitution.
Click to expand...

Anyone that Bl-Obama nominates will destroy the Constitution. Well, what is left of it that we actually follow, that is.
 
Horrible said:
With all of the hub-bub surrounding the elections, Bl-Obama probably is feeling left out. So, here we go.

Is it going to be Devalue?

- - - Updated - - -



Anyone that Bl-Obama nominates will destroy the Constitution. Well, what is left of it that we actually follow, that is.
Click to expand...

I don't think there is any way that Cadillac would make it onto the SCOTUS. He has *way* too much baggage and is a proven racist. The R's would block the heck out of him.
 
knfmn said:
I don't think there is any way that Cadillac would make it onto the SCOTUS. He has *way* too much baggage and is a proven racist. The R's would block the heck out of him.
Click to expand...

like the spineless ones who just completely funded his agenda with the omnibus, AND just voted to confirm a common-core Secretary of Education just this week? THOSE 'R's'?
 
JayMcB said:
like the spineless ones who just completely funded his agenda with the omnibus, AND just voted to confirm a common-core Secretary of Education just this week? THOSE 'R's'?
Click to expand...


sadly, this. The 'R's' are so worried about their image in the news, that they will cave. Sure, they will put on a small show of pushback but no, they will eventually cave.
 
Sources have told The Associated Press that Obama has narrowed the list to three appeals court judges: Merrick Garland, the chief judge of the appeals courts in Washington, D.C.; Sri Srinivasan, a judge on that court; and Paul Watford of the appeals courts based in San Francisco.
Click to expand...

This should be good. Looks like all are Liberals.
 
Who cares who he nominates...he's as lame as they come now and nothing will get done until they boot him out of the Whitehut and have it fumigated. I just hope he doesn't start a war between now and when he's escorted to his cab
 
knfmn said:
Should be fun. I bet he'll nominate someone who appears conservative on the outside, but has a hidden flaw that will happen to come out that will completely prevent him from getting on the court. If the Republicans refuse to proceed with confirmation hearings, they'll appear unreasonable. Once the first guy gets shot down, he will drag out an ideologue who will spend the next 20 years destroying the constitution.
Click to expand...

Like the Indian guy...Sri Srinivatsan? The guy who got approved for his current seat by a 97-0 vote?
 
This is another topic that the GOP is pissing off the electorate. Have hearings - have a vote - and if you don't like him/her vote no. The posturing and declaratory statements about what they won't do only serves to further the demonstration that they are indeed fools.

Don't worry, even if the person is 100% conservative down the line - 0bama has already been in contact with the NSA/FBI and have info on the person to make them pliable.
 
the_shootist said:
Who cares who he nominates...he's as lame as they come now and nothing will get done until they boot him out of the Whitehut and have it fumigated. I just hope he doesn't start a war between now and when he's escorted to his cab
Click to expand...

I actually expected him to start a civil war by now, but he does have enough time left to start it!!
 
Gak44 said:
I actually expected him to start a civil war by now, but he does have enough time left to start it!!
Click to expand...

I am just going to giggle my mother effing ass off when Obama leaves office on Jan 21 without declaring marshal law or canceling the election. You know...that idiotic shit people here have been saying since forever.
 
blindfire said:
I am just going to giggle my mother effing ass off when Obama leaves office on Jan 21 without declaring marshal law or canceling the election. You know...that idiotic shit people here have been saying since forever.
Click to expand...

My board of choice for discussing politics during the Bush administration was dominated by people on the left. I heard soooooo many times that Bush would be the last president, that he would become a dictator and never leave office, etc.

It's how people cope with being on the losing side of an election, rather than trying to actually work with the side that got more votes to come up with ideas and solutions that they don't love, but can live with.
 
This is how it works right? The POTUS nominates someone and the Senate majority has to agree to that person?

So chances are, Senate won't vote to appoint his nominee and then what happens?
 
blindfire said:
Like the Indian guy...Sri Srinivatsan? The guy who got approved for his current seat by a 97-0 vote?
Click to expand...

This guy is a blank page - not a whole lot of experience and what there is seems to be very tempered toward a center slightly left position.

Double edged sword - while there is nothing to say no to, there is also nothing to make you say yes either.
 
GaryO said:
Remember, Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review yet never wrote a legal brief. If he is such a genius, why haven't his college transcripts ever been released?
Click to expand...
Libs don't require it. Like the fake indian checking and un-checking the box. They won't let the facts get in the way.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
Merrill garland obama's choice hates guns

Has history of strong opposition to gun rights......light up the phone lines guys.....he's bad news

- - - Updated - - -

Mis-spelled first name. Merick
 
Merrick Garland would be bad, real bad: The “Moderates” Are Not So Moderate: Merrick Garland
Back in 2007, Judge Garland voted to undo a D.C. Circuit court decision striking down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation.
...
He voted with Judge David Tatel, one of the most liberal judges on that court. As Dave Kopel observed at the time, the “[t]he Tatel and Garland votes were no surprise, since they had earlier signaled their strong hostility to gun owner rights” in a previous case.
...
Garland voted with Tatel to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement...the Clinton Administration had been “retaining for six months the records of lawful gun buyers from the National Instant Check System.”
...
Garland thought all of these regulations were legal
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Nevada Supreme Court Upholds Ban on So-Called ‘Ghost Guns’
Replies
4
Views
179
Dennis in MA
Dennis in MA
The NRA Is About to Notch Another Legal Victory at the Supreme Court
Replies
13
Views
645
groundscrapers
G
Supreme Court and guns in the news (search 3/4/24)
Replies
0
Views
184
Coyote33
Coyote33
The Supreme Court will decide whether to let civilians own automatic weapons
2
Replies
59
Views
2K
Joeldiaz
J
New York's Radical Gun Restrictions Headed To Supreme Court
Replies
1
Views
291
Rob Boudrie
Rob Boudrie
Back
Top Bottom