Maybe now would be a bad time for SCOTUS to take a 2nd Amendment case

[Aim1]

if Justice Kennedy decides to retire shortly he could be the critical 5th vote on a 2nd Amendment case such as Peruta v. County of San Diego. Kennedy voted for the 2nd Amendment in the Heller and McDonald cases.

If they choose to grant cert on that case when they hear the application for it next week there will be 9 justices on SCOTUS. Hopefully enough for at least a 5-4 in favor of gun rights. However, if they grant cert on that case soon and then Kennedy retires that will make the SCOTUS makeup 8 justices and if they ruled 4-4 then the original ruling stands and that would be that the 2nd Amendment doesn't protect carry outside of the home. If President Trump couldn't confirm a new justice before they ruled on a gun case that could be bad for us.



https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/...ement-talk-focuses-on-pivotal-justice-kennedy

Supreme Court Retirement Talk Focuses on Pivotal Justice Kennedy

by Greg Stohr April 11, 2017, 1:40 PM CDT

Justice Anthony Kennedy reclaimed his position as the man in the middle of the U.S. Supreme Court when he swore in Neil Gorsuch, his former law clerk, as the newest justice.

The question is whether Kennedy wants to keep that pivotal role in close decisions for longer than a few more months.

 

[ilbob]

You never really know with these guys anyway. Judges that seem pretty solid have come up with some really strange rulings when they get on the court. for all we know a meteor might hit Washington DC. Best to just move forward.

 

[denton]

Yesterday, Justice Ginsburg called Lindsey Graham one of the "women in the Senate". Given that, and her outburst about Trump, can retirement be far away?

 

[v35]

Yesterday, Justice Ginsburg called Lindsey Graham one of the "women in the Senate". Given that, and her outburst about Trump, can retirement be far away?

Not if she doesn't do so voluntarily. Impeachment and removal (both) by Congress is the only other option, and that's not likely to occur. Outbursts and even lapses of judgement such as you describe fall far short of meeting any reasonable criteria for impeachment.

The only Justice to ever have been impeached was appointed by George Washington, and he was not removed by Congress.

 

[denton]

Not if she doesn't do so voluntarily. Impeachment and removal (both) by Congress is the only other option, and that's not likely to occur. Outbursts and even lapses of judgement such as you describe fall far short of meeting any reasonable criteria for impeachment.

Oh I'm sure that she will be there as long as she chooses to be. The Founders deliberately insulated the Justices from the whims of politics, and that was a wise choice.

But I'm thinking she may realize that her mental powers are not what they once were and that the country would be better served if she stepped down.

Many of us strongly disagree with her opinions and world view. But I do believe that she is doing her utmost to serve the country well.

 

[Cannibul]

If any opening on the SC occurs it won't take long to get another Justice on the Court. Now that it only takes 51 votes in the Senate for confirmation President Trump can pick a very young very Conservative Justice and the Democrats will be able to do NOTHING about it.

 

[Robert]

This one is barely on topic to begin with and then we went far off topic so we are done here.