What's new
By:
Filters

I like her.

I guess it should be noted that 52 Republicans voted yes

Susan Collins R-Maine and all Democrats and Angus King I-Maine voted No.
 
CNN dismissed Amy Coney-Barret as 'Trump's Supreme Court nominee':

qb0NHrR.png
 
evernoob said:
He's an example of what the Court should be: not always to your liking

I'm afraid we'll have to counter Leftist Judicial Activism with Rightist Activism and I don't want that. I want a Justice that will vote for law even if I don't like it.
Click to expand...

Absolutely this. FUCK the ideology, rule on the constitution.
 
TrikeKid said:
Would you expect any less than them being dismissive? You'd think they would at least rally around having another woman on the court.
Click to expand...

One of the main reasons they hate her is that she overshadows RBG by a good margin.

Imagine having your hero woman being absolutely mogged by Superwoman.
 
Trump just walked out to swear in ACB, and Clarence Thomas, the longest-serving member, will swear her in.

What an iconic photo, I hope we get high-res versions.

Imagine the Republican Party appointing the most auspicious Black and Female Justices to ever serve on the Court.

PQnCUvD.png
 
petro812 said:
Dude, there is a shitton to be said about swarmy women throwing swords from a lake and the infallibility of those who should rule us. You should know better.
Click to expand...

The Supreme Court does not rule us, our Constitution does.

Amy Coney Barret just gave an acceptance speech to that exact point. I'll look around and post it as soon as it appears.
 
34:30, Justice Thomas swears ACB in

36:15, ACB's speech begins, I strongly recommend listening to it, it's short.

"It is the job of a Judge to resist her policy preferences. It would be a dereliction of duty for her to give in to them. Federal Judges don't stand for election, thus they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the People.

This separation of duty from political preference is what makes the Judiciary distinct among the three branches of government. A judge declares independence, not only from Congress and the President, but also from the private beliefs that might otherwise move her. The Judicial Oath captures the essence of the Judicial Duty. The Rule of Law must always control.

My fellow Americans, even though we Judges don't face elections, we still work for you. It is your Constitution that establishes the Rule of Law, and the judicial independence that is so central to it."

 
Last edited:
evernoob said:
34:30, Justice Thomas swears ACB in

36:15, ACB's speech begins, I strongly recommend listening to it, it's short.

"It is the job of a Judge to resist her policy preferences. It would be a dereliction of duty for her to give in to them. Federal Judges don't stand for election, thus they have no basis for claiming that their preferences reflect those of the People.

This separation of duty from political preference is what makes the Judiciary distinct among the three branches of government. A judge declares independence, not only from Congress and the President, but also from the private beliefs that might otherwise move her. The Judicial Oath captures the essence of the Judicial Duty. The Rule of Law must always control.

My fellow Americans, even though we Judges don't face elections, we still work for you. It is your Constitution that establishes the Rule of Law, and the judicial independence that is so central to it."

Click to expand...


That's the way it's supposed to be, and why SCOTUS judges are not subject to elections. The framers got it right.
 
I can't be the only one who recognizes childhood trauma in her vocal tone. She sounds like an 11yo when she speaks. I'm not denouncing her credibility, just making an observation.
 
evernoob said:
The Supreme Court does not rule us, our Constitution does.

Amy Coney Barret just gave an acceptance speech to that exact point. I'll look around and post it as soon as it appears.
Click to expand...

my biggest concern about her from the senate questioning was that she seems very timid on enforcing the constitution over congress. a few times, she basically said "well, if the people want the law, represented by congress passing it, then it should be remedied in congress and not in the courts"

i.e. i don't see her taking a stand against the NFA for being wholly unconstitutional because "the people" voted for it
 
trampas said:
I can't be the only one who recognizes childhood trauma in her vocal tone. She sounds like an 11yo when she speaks. I'm not denouncing her credibility, just making an observation.
Click to expand...

I think what you hear is her dumbing down her answers for the idiots interviewing her, like speaking to a small child.
 
SanDiegoCJ said:
I have no idea. You can make all the wild speculations you want.
Click to expand...

If only you could tell they way someone thinks by their actions or opinions they have written. Oh well too bad you can't and there is no way except for wild speculations to do that. Sleepy Joe cj says so and I believe him.
I do agree that you have no idea though so theres that.
 
Mr.Ratbastard said:
If only you could tell they way someone thinks by their actions or opinions they have written. Oh well too bad you can't and there is no way except for wild speculations to do that. Sleepy Joe cj says so and I believe him.
I do agree that you have no idea though so theres that.
Click to expand...

Thanks for proving my point. All you're doing is speculating, using your personal bias as a filter. What I see is you feeling they don't care about COTUS because they see it differently than you.
 
SanDiegoCJ said:
Thanks for proving my point. All you're doing is speculating, using your personal bias as a filter. What I see is you feeling they don't care about COTUS because they see it differently than you.
Click to expand...

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/a...omayor_and_racial_preference_cases_96802.html

The debate over the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor has revived the debate over racial preferences - not only because of speculation that Sotomayor herself is an "affirmative action" pick as a Hispanic woman, but also because of her role in the controversial case of Ricci v. DeStefano. It involves a lawsuit by 18 firefighters (17 whites and one Hispanic) in New Haven, Connecticut, denied promotions to lieutenant and captain because no black applicants passed the test. Fearing charges of race discrimination, the city threw out the test and left the vacancies unfilled.

As it happens, we know where Sotomayor stands on the case: she was one of three federal judges who, in a one-paragraph opinion, voted to dismiss the lawsuit.

At the hearing, Judge Sotomayor suggested that the test in question was arbitrary and that the city could have devised "a fair test" to measure job-related knowledge without producing a disproportionate failure rate among minorities.

But, as an attorney for the plaintiffs pointed out, the city had actually hired an expert to ensure that the test was both fair and valid as a job qualification measurement. African-American fire department officials were also consulted.

Yet, according to Judge Sotomayor, the test is unacceptable if it "is always going to put a certain group at the bottom of the pass rate so they're never ever going to be promoted." That's a startlingly pessimistic assessment of black candidates' chances.
Click to expand...

ya know, nevermind all that

en. Mel Martinez Said He Took "Great Pride" In Sotomayor Nomination," Added Her Life Story "Is One Of Great Accomplishments And A Source of Inspiration." "As an Hispanic-American, I take great pride in seeing the nomination of an Hispanic person to serve in this high position - an historic first. Judge Sonia Sotomayor's personal life story is one of great accomplishments and a source of inspiration; it also demonstrates the great opportunities our nation has to offer." [Martinez Statement, 5/26/09]
Click to expand...

not weird at all for a sitting justice to endorse a nominee :rasta:

Justice Ginsburg Said Sotomayor Will Bring "A Wealth Of Experience In Law And In Life." "Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, addressing the annual conference of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit on Friday, signaled her admiration for 2nd Circuit Judge Sonia Sotomayor, the nominee to replace retiring justice David Souter. ‘As much as I will miss Justice Souter's company,’ she said, reviewing top Court events of the last year, ‘I was cheered by the next banner headline,’ namely President Barack Obama's selection of Sotomayor as the next associate justice. ‘The nominee will bring to the Supreme Court, as she did to the district court and then the Court of Appeals, a wealth of experience in law and in life,’ Ginsburg said. ‘And I am so glad no longer to be the lone woman on the court.’ Implicitly assuming that Sotomayor will be confirmed, she added, ‘I look forward to a new colleague well-equipped to handle the challenges our work presents.’" [Blog of Legal Times, 6/14/09]
Click to expand...

Former Chief Judge of D.C. Circuit Patricia Wald Said Sotomayor Would Be An Independent, Realistic Judge: "She Knows What Judging Is About." "Sotomayor's writings strongly suggest she will be independent, realistic but not passive about the limits of judicial power. And she will bring a new voice to the court. I am thrilled that the likely next justice is a woman from an ethnic and economic background that is not the traditional grist for the judicial mill. I am a firm believer that a judge does and should bring her life's experience to her judicial role…She knows what judging is about. I applaud President Obama's fidelity to his campaign pledge to appoint federal judges who, apart from excellence of intellect, bring varied backgrounds and exposure to different facets of American life to the bench." [Washington Post, 5/26/09]
Click to expand...

i guess she did get one thing right, once, regarding the lautenburg amendment, but for the wrong reasons

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/USA-U...-with-Justice-Thomas-on-a-gun-control-dissent

The case, Voisine et al. v. United States, was not the first time that the Supreme Court had heard a challenge to the amendment. Related cases were decided in 2014 and 2009,

First, during the arguments in February, the case became the first time Justice Clarence Thomas had asked a question in court in ten years. As Assistant Solicitor General Ilana H. Eisenstein was wrapping up her case, Justice Thomas asked: “Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor violation suspends a constitutional right?”

Then in Monday’s dissent, Thomas, who voted against the federal law, was joined by an unusual ally, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor. That meant in the 6-2 decision, one dissenting vote came from a conservative, Thomas, while the other was from a liberal, Justice Sotomayor, which could seem like a contradiction. In 2014, Sotomayor voted in favor of upholding the restrictions on misdemeanants in a case challenging the Lautenberg Amendment, writes The Washington Post.

Then, she spoke in favor of a broader definition of domestic violence: “Minor uses of force may not constitute ‘violence’ in the generic sense,” Sotomayor wrote. But even a small act of forcible touching “is easy to describe as ‘domestic violence,’ when the accumulation of such acts over time can subject one intimate partner to the other’s control.”

In Monday's ruling, how actions are defined was also at the crux of the case. And it was on this point that Sotomayor, who did not agree with Thomas’ opinion that the Second Amendment is being treated “cavalierly," landed on the same decision he did.
Click to expand...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...urt-liberal-hispanic-decade-bench/1882245001/

After 10 years on the Supreme Court, Sotomayor, 65, is not only its most outspoken questioner – succeeding the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who inspired today's "hot bench" – but its most frequent public speaker and most prolific author. Her voice, in all its forms, has become the liberal conscience on a conservative court, one that speaks out in defense of minorities, immigrants, criminal defendants and death row inmates.
Click to expand...

i think the last quote pretty much sums up what it means to be an "activist justice"
 
of course, it wasn't like she didn't tell us in advance that her ethnicity and gender were more important to her than anything else. proving she can be added to the long list of racially motivated bigots nominated by democrats :rasta:

Sotomayor's Hispanic connections run deep. During her Senate confirmation hearing in 2009, she was forced to explain her hope that "a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”
Click to expand...

Sotomayor was President Barack Obama's choice to fill the first Supreme Court seat that became vacant on his watch, and she has not disappointed. Since winning Senate confirmation 68-31 and being sworn in Aug. 8, 2009, to succeed former associate justice David Souter, she has been a reliable member of the court's liberal wing.

These days, she may be the court's most liberal member. She and Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the grande dame of the court's left flank, agreed in 93% of the court's cases last term
Click to expand...
 
I love the delicious irony of Shumer's threat ""My colleagues may regret this for a lot longer than they think " .

Uh, kinda like Harry Reid's elimination of the 60 vote needed to confirm Federal Judges?

Bet they are kicking themselves now, well no, because they have convinced themselves that it is all the Evil Republicans fault for not playing fair...
 
trampas said:
I can't be the only one who recognizes childhood trauma in her vocal tone. She sounds like an 11yo when she speaks. I'm not denouncing her credibility, just making an observation.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, you haven't mentioned being a parent. Or being a teacher except that you banged yours in HS :lmao: What makes you so keen as to the psychological tenor of an 11 yo pre-pubescent woman ?? Just making an observation :flipoff2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh