Trump Interviews 4 Supreme Court Prospects in Rush to Name Replacement

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/02/us/politics/trump-supreme-court-nomination.html?WT.nav=top-news&action=click&auth=login-email&clickSource=story-heading&hp&login=email&module=first-column-region&pgtype=Homepage&region=top-news

********

Too funny. You are going to get an ulcer over your obsession with the Trumpet. Kinda weird though...this obsession.

Obsession or intelligence. The lack of the same is duly noted. Fascism is incremental. Good people must act to counter evil.....and those cowards who get along to go along.....they die a thousand deaths from cowardice. May people of courage stand in front of the fascist surge and let those cowards who throw out their brainless criticism out of fear die their coward's thousand deaths.

Just off the top of my head, I'd say a few of the factors in Trump's choice will be the one who is:

*  Most likely to look favorably upon the concept of the "Unitary Presidency"

*  Most likely to support State's rights to structure abortion laws and other conservative Christian pet peeves.

*  Most likely to not have any problem overturning established SCOTUS precedents

* Most likely to sail through a quick confirmation with minimal fuss from moderate Republicans in the Senate. (like Susan Collins)

But like I always say:  "Ya never know, with Trump"

Trump'll pick the one that looks best on TV.

Speaking of which, where's Giuliani been lately?

Deus X wrote:Trump'll pick the one that looks best on TV.

Speaking of which, where's Giuliani been lately?

Getting ready for his close up.

Here's a comment from the NYT article:

Abortion rights are just a shiny object that Trump uses to distract from the real reason he is pushing to get a sycophant on the Court and Democrats are falling for it. One of the first cases on the docket in the fall will deal with double jeopardy. From CNN: “The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case in the fall to consider whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment bars states and the federal government from separately trying the same person for the same criminal offense.” If the case is won, this means that Trump would be able to pardon people like Michael Cohen and Cohen cannot then be separately tried in Manhattan, REGARDLESS of the laws in New York state. Federal law will supersede state law. You can bet that any nominees will be “judged” by their opinions on this matter.

Floridatexan wrote:
Abortion rights are just a shiny object that Trump uses to distract from the real reason he is pushing to get a sycophant on the Court and Democrats are falling for it. One of the first cases on the docket in the fall will deal with double jeopardy. From CNN: “The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case in the fall to consider whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment bars states and the federal government from separately trying the same person for the same criminal offense.” If the case is won, this means that Trump would be able to pardon people like Michael Cohen and Cohen cannot then be separately tried in Manhattan, REGARDLESS of the laws in New York state. Federal law will supersede state law. You can bet that any nominees will be “judged” by their opinions on this matter.

HONK! C'mon, FT, do your homework--the State of New York already prohibits "separate-sovereigns double jeopardy" so it wouldn't affect Cohen.

Many states, including New York, prohibit the trial of individuals who have been convicted for the same offense by the federal government.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/supreme-court-double-jeopardy-clause/index.html

Besides, it's the LIBERAL justices who would oppose the double-jeopardy unfairness, not the conservatives. This case, Gamble v. U.S., is about some low-life with reefer and a gun--conservatives would decide triple-jeopardy was okay, if they could.

Deus X wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
Abortion rights are just a shiny object that Trump uses to distract from the real reason he is pushing to get a sycophant on the Court and Democrats are falling for it. One of the first cases on the docket in the fall will deal with double jeopardy. From CNN: “The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case in the fall to consider whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment bars states and the federal government from separately trying the same person for the same criminal offense.” If the case is won, this means that Trump would be able to pardon people like Michael Cohen and Cohen cannot then be separately tried in Manhattan, REGARDLESS of the laws in New York state. Federal law will supersede state law. You can bet that any nominees will be “judged” by their opinions on this matter.

HONK! C'mon, FT, do your homework--the State of New York already prohibits "separate-sovereigns double jeopardy" so it wouldn't affect Cohen.

Many states, including New York, prohibit the trial of individuals who have been convicted for the same offense by the federal government.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/supreme-court-double-jeopardy-clause/index.html

Besides, it's the LIBERAL justices who would oppose the double-jeopardy unfairness, not the conservatives. This case, Gamble v. U.S., is about some low-life with reefer and a gun--conservatives would decide triple-jeopardy was okay, if they could.

Drumpf desperately needs a get out of jail free card. What would you do?

Floridatexan wrote:

Drumpf desperately needs a get out of jail free card.  What would you do?

Ignore leftist wailing and gnashing of teeth and appoint a real constitutional scholar.

Then watch heads explode.

Floridatexan wrote:

Deus X wrote:

Floridatexan wrote:
Abortion rights are just a shiny object that Trump uses to distract from the real reason he is pushing to get a sycophant on the Court and Democrats are falling for it. One of the first cases on the docket in the fall will deal with double jeopardy. From CNN: “The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear a case in the fall to consider whether the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment bars states and the federal government from separately trying the same person for the same criminal offense.” If the case is won, this means that Trump would be able to pardon people like Michael Cohen and Cohen cannot then be separately tried in Manhattan, REGARDLESS of the laws in New York state. Federal law will supersede state law. You can bet that any nominees will be “judged” by their opinions on this matter.

HONK! C'mon, FT, do your homework--the State of New York already prohibits "separate-sovereigns double jeopardy" so it wouldn't affect Cohen.

Many states, including New York, prohibit the trial of individuals who have been convicted for the same offense by the federal government.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/28/politics/supreme-court-double-jeopardy-clause/index.html

Besides, it's the LIBERAL justices who would oppose the double-jeopardy unfairness, not the conservatives. This case, Gamble v. U.S., is about some low-life with reefer and a gun--conservatives would decide triple-jeopardy was okay, if they could.

Drumpf desperately needs a get out of jail free card.  What would you do?

I just don't see how this case, Gamble v. U.S., has anything to do with Trump's potential legal situation.