Justice Kennedy to retire, Trump can solidify court's conservative majority

[stolivar]

A d I heard nothing on the woman if they are pro gun


Steve

 

[reddog81]

Basically the logic of the amendment says that without the militia existence there is no requirement for the gun ownership right. Not that folks can’t still be allowed to own guns, but there is no requirement that they be allowed to do so. So whatever the court decides, it is new law.

You're assuming militias are completely irrelevant now and forever in the future. Just because militias have never been necessary, who says they will never have any use? Without people having acces to firearms you completely eliminate the possibility for a militia to ever exist. It's hard to imagine a scenario where militias would be necessary but I don't think that means you can dismiss the 2nd admendment as unnecessary. Just because you haven't excercised a right doesn't mean you should lose that right.

IMO the 2nd admendment applies to all firearms and includes any firearms a milita would potentially use which includes any firearms a military would use. Hopefully there are a couple Supreme Court candidates who agree.

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

I heard 5 names today, 2 women, none were Lee.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...weigh-senator-mike-lee-for-high-court-vacancy
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ered-to-replace-kennedy-on-supreme-court.html

 

[Aim1]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...weigh-senator-mike-lee-for-high-court-vacancy
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...ered-to-replace-kennedy-on-supreme-court.html

Nice. I think people are really guessing because yesterday they had some guy named Tart from Texas who was a big Twitter user and seemed like a horrible choice because of it.


http://foxnews.com/politics/2018/06...cessor-to-supreme-courts-justice-kennedy.html

 

[Fine Figure of a Man]

IMO the 2nd admendment applies to all firearms and includes any firearms a milita would potentially use which includes any firearms a military would use.

Absolutely
The Founding Fathers knew tyranny would always be a threat to the republic.

 

[Walkalong]

One thing to bear in mind is that if the Court becomes too conservative, the Democrats, when they come back into power, will increase the membership to 11 or 15 Justices (court packing). FDR failed to do that in the 1930's, but there were a lot of conservative Democrats back then. Today the Democratic Party is far more to the left. They will do this, and then the 2A will once again be in danger.

Are you psychic now, just crying wolf, or just spreading seeds of doubt? What makes you think either party is going to get enough votes to do this.

 

[Hokie_PhD]

A d I heard nothing on the woman if they are pro gun


Steve

Trump has made it clear that the list of 25 that he released will be used. The list is of conservatives who are not activists. All but Lee are judges.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0633c5d63985

Gives a little info on some being considered.

Amy Coney Barrett has been mentioned as a great pick to fight the sexism claims. Another report said that two of the five that Trump is currently considering are female. And yet several reports said that abortion and guns are not issues that will be discussed when the candidates meet with the President.

The rationale is that those in the list have been reviewed by many conservatives and asking specific questions about cases that may be reviewed is wrong. That said, it’s likely that no matter who is nominated the opposition will attack anyone nominated and improperly ask about abortion and maybe guns in the Senate hearings.

As we know a justice can be one way before getting on the Supreme Court then shift. So all we can do is hope and pray Gorsuch doesn’t and whoever replaces Kennedy likewise doesn’t. If so, I think we’ll see they’ll be pro 2nd Amendment.

 

[RPZ]

Just my himble humble opinion, but the only review questions Senators should be asking when candidates are "reviewed" is about their experience, past record, and if they will swear to "uphold and defend the Constitution". That's it.

 

[Hokie_PhD]

Just my himble humble opinion, but the only review questions Senators should be asking when candidates are "reviewed" is about their experience, past record, and if they will swear to "uphold and defend the Constitution". That's it.

But how do you do that when you are for destroying the Constitution like some are now finally admitting as their ultimate goal?

 

[RPZ]

But how do you do that when you are for destroying the Constitution like some are now finally admitting as their ultimate goal?

When they attempt to do it. And when they do, the same Congress should impeach them.

We have no say in the appointment of SCOTUS Justices. We do have a say in who is in Congress and who is President. I am more concerned with who is President and in Congress and what their personal views are on things. Congress, at least in peacetime, is the real seat of power in this country. The Pres appoints SCOTUS justices.

If we have rotten SCOTUS justices, and I understand completely what you mean (above), it is the job of Congress to impeach them.

 

[Robert]

Let's call it a day on this one.