SCOTUS

[Peter Brown]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

Please compare the conservative reaction to todays Biden's SCOTUS pick (sane) compared to the left-wing reaction to Trump's (insane). The two sides are not the same.

There are no hysterical analyses.

From years ago and an interesting family relation:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/potenti ... d=37187861

[seacoaster]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

There's not much negative to say about her, unless you don't understand what the Courts do and how they do it (see above). She went to Harvard College and Harvard Law School, then worked as a law clerk for two of the brighter Judges in the First Circuit (ME, NH, MA, RI and Puerto Rico) Patty Saris, a well regarded and very tough federal district judge, and Bruce Selya, a judge on the Court of Appeals in Boston. She then clerked for the Justice she will replace.

She worked in private practice with a then-super connected Washington DC firm, then with the US Sentencing Commission as its general counsel, I think, and then worked as a public defender, arguing criminal appeals at the DC Circuit, then court she sits on now. She became an appellate attorney at a big and well-known San Francisco based firm in its DC office. She has experience as both a trial judge and an appeals judge, something I am not sure is currently featured by any member of the Court.

In terms of basic qualifications for the judge -- academic excellence, breadth of experience -- her credentials are as good as any current member of the Supreme Court and, candidly, better than a few of them.

I will add a postscript: we have had something like 3,800 federal judges in this country, and only 70 have been black Americans. There have been 115 Supreme Court justices, and only two have been black, Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas. Kind of seems like the timing is, umm, overdue.

[Typical Lax Dad]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

There's not much negative to say about her, unless you don't understand what the Courts do and how they do it (see above). She went to Harvard College and Harvard Law School, then worked as a law clerk for two of the brighter Judges in the First Circuit (ME, NH, MA, RI and Puerto Rico) Patty Saris, a well regarded and very tough federal district judge, and Bruce Selya, a judge on the Court of Appeals in Boston. She then clerked for the Justice she will replace.

She worked in private practice with a then-super connected Washington DC firm, then with the US Sentencing Commission as its general counsel, I think, and then worked as a public defender, arguing criminal appeals at the DC Circuit, then court she sits on now. She became an appellate attorney at a big and well-known San Francisco based firm in its DC office. She has experience as both a trial judge and an appeals judge, something I am not sure is currently featured by any member of the Court.

In terms of basic qualifications for the judge -- academic excellence, breadth of experience -- her credentials are as good as any current member of the Supreme Court and, candidly, better than a few of them.

I will add a postscript: we have had something like 3,800 federal judges in this country, and only 70 have been black Americans. There have been 115 Supreme Court justices, and only two have been black, Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas. Kind of seems like the timing is, umm, overdue.

I read some stuff on her background and feel good about her and the opportunity she has. Really impressive. Thanks for the additional context.

[MDlaxfan76]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

[runrussellrun]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

but you're perfectly fine calling a guy at a school committee meeting, whose daughter was raped in a school, a terrorist?

see the issue here?

[MDlaxfan76]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

but you're perfectly fine calling a guy at a school committee meeting, whose daughter was raped in a school, a terrorist?

see the issue here?

Me?
Perhaps you have me confused with someone else. Before you go on another tirade, I assure you that I do know what your twisted reference is intended to be about.

1+1 = 3 logic.

[runrussellrun]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

Boy, do you fall for all this misinformation....thinking it's all true. Newsweek

hear, try reality. The actual RNC talking points: ( never been a member of this party, the GOP. You, mdlax

https://gop.com/research/meet-ketanji-b ... ckson-rsr/


Biden’s Pick Is A Radical, Left-Wing Activist Who Will Rubberstamp His Failed Agenda

KETANJI BROWN JACKSON: A RUBBERSTAMP FOR BIDEN’S AGENDA

Today, Biden nominated Ketanji Brown Jackson, a Democrat partisan who will put far-left special interests ahead of defending the liberties of Americans, to the Supreme Court.
Jackson would be the left-wing activist judge that Biden has repeatedly promised he would nominate and who would be a rubberstamp for his far-left policies.
NBC News: “Jackson fits well with the Democratic Party and the progressive movement's agenda” and that “her labor-friendly rulings as a judge have drawn praise.”
“Liberal advocacy organizations” pushed for Jackson to be on Biden’s list of Supreme Court nominees.
Jackson is a Democrat partisan, having worked for Obama’s presidential campaign as a poll monitor and donated to Obama.
Jackson is a registered Democrat, and her husband donated $1,600 to Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

JACKSON’S RULINGS FAVOR THE LEFT

In just a few short years on the bench, Jackson repeatedly has ruled against conservative policies.
Jackson blocked President Trump’s executive orders to hold failing federal employees accountable – a decision that the D.C. Circuit unanimously reversed.
Jackson blocked the Trump administration from expanding its “Expedited Removal” program to deport illegal immigrants faster, absurdly saying that DHS did not consider the impact on illegal immigrants.
A liberal immigration group even applauded Jackson because she refuses to use the term “alien” or “illegal” immigrant in her opinions.
Jackson ruled in 2019 that former White House Counsel Don McGahn had to comply with a subpoena from Congressional Democrats, a decision an appeals judge said wrongly gave power to “unelected judges.”
In 2015, Jackson ruled in favor of Hillary Clinton aide Phillipe Reines, shielding him from having to explain why he used a private email account for official work.
Jackson has “a striking record of reversals” of her decisions by appeals courts.

JACKSON HAS A RECORD THAT INCLUDES DEFENDING TERRORISTS

Jackson worked as a lawyer for several terrorists detained at Guantánamo Bay, including a Taliban intelligence officer who was likely a leader of a terrorist cell.
Jackson’s advocacy for these terrorists was “zealous,” going beyond just giving them a competent defense.
Despite Jackson’s claim that she did not get to choose her clients as a public defender, she continued to advocate for Guantanamo terrorists when she went into private practice.
In 2001, Jackson was part of an amicus brief filed by several pro-abortion groups including NARAL in support of a “buffer zone” around abortion clinics that targeted the free speech rights of pro-life Americans.

JACKSON’S BACKGROUND RAISES SERIOUS QUESTIONS

Jackson is affiliated with multiple groups that raise questions about her judgment and how she would rule on the Supreme Court.
Jackson is a member of Harvard University’s Board of Overseers, which, if she were confirmed, would pose a conflict of interest in the highly contentious Harvard race-based admissions case.
Jackson is a member of the Cosmos Club, a private D.C. club of the Washington elite.
Jackson served as Director of the Harvard Alumni Association when the organization planned and later cancelled a trip to North Korea where alumni were told to show “respect” for Kim Jong-II.

Why does Newsweek have to make stuff up....lie, embellish, etc?

Cosmos club is a huge feather, she will get GOP support.....

[Farfromgeneva]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

There's not much negative to say about her, unless you don't understand what the Courts do and how they do it (see above). She went to Harvard College and Harvard Law School, then worked as a law clerk for two of the brighter Judges in the First Circuit (ME, NH, MA, RI and Puerto Rico) Patty Saris, a well regarded and very tough federal district judge, and Bruce Selya, a judge on the Court of Appeals in Boston. She then clerked for the Justice she will replace.

She worked in private practice with a then-super connected Washington DC firm, then with the US Sentencing Commission as its general counsel, I think, and then worked as a public defender, arguing criminal appeals at the DC Circuit, then court she sits on now. She became an appellate attorney at a big and well-known San Francisco based firm in its DC office. She has experience as both a trial judge and an appeals judge, something I am not sure is currently featured by any member of the Court.

In terms of basic qualifications for the judge -- academic excellence, breadth of experience -- her credentials are as good as any current member of the Supreme Court and, candidly, better than a few of them.

I will add a postscript: we have had something like 3,800 federal judges in this country, and only 70 have been black Americans. There have been 115 Supreme Court justices, and only two have been black, Thurgood Marshall and Clarence Thomas. Kind of seems like the timing is, umm, overdue.

Thanks appreciate it. Seemed fine in the little bit I viewed but good to hear from another who’s sober and serious.

[runrussellrun]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

but you're perfectly fine calling a guy at a school committee meeting, whose daughter was raped in a school, a terrorist?

see the issue here?

Me?
Perhaps you have me confused with someone else. Before you go on another tirade, I assure you that I do know what your twisted reference is intended to be about.

1+1 = 3 logic.

You type in "Loudon" in the search function, and there you are. your words, posted on another thread.

[MDlaxfan76]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

but you're perfectly fine calling a guy at a school committee meeting, whose daughter was raped in a school, a terrorist?

see the issue here?

Me?
Perhaps you have me confused with someone else. Before you go on another tirade, I assure you that I do know what your twisted reference is intended to be about.

1+1 = 3 logic.

You type in "Loudon" in the search function, and there you are. your words, posted on another thread.

so what? I didn't call anyone whose daughter was raped a terrorist.

[MDlaxfan76]

Re: Biden Admin Fascism
Edit Report Quote
Post by MDlaxfan76 » Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:14 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:09 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:56 pm
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:43 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 22, 2021 12:21 pm
kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:42 am
The Biden DoJ: Conflating irate parents and domestic terrorists:

https://www.ocpathink.org/post/school-b ... rs-respond


Wow, what a load.

Incredibly slanted, a pile of BS.

There are actual acts and threats of violence and intimidation, in-person and online, that are correctly considered to be "terrorist" in nature. The intent is to scare people into submission, changing policy.

Simply being ill-informed is not. Having a dumb opinion is not. But fomenting violence and intimidation, and those who take the next steps to do so, is indeed a serious problem.

This isn't simply "contentious" meetings, it's actual threats against school board members and their families.
You just summed up your entire take on this situation.

A child was raped....

a child was raped in a Loudon County school building

The perp.......was shipped off to another school building, instead of "jail".

The perp.........raped ANOTHER child in a Loundon County school building.

child victim DAD attends school board meeting

Folks working on behest of the Loundon cty schools have NO idea what this guy , angry dad, is talking.

These are the facts......and you call OTHERS misinformed ?

You must have sided with Mikey Duke, when asked about rape. ..........

just wow.

why bother.......
Again, different topic rrr...but hey, you got me to react, which probably is your only objective.

actually, no, it IS not a different topic. Scott Smith and the Loudon cty school board "terror" IS the topic at hand. geez.

We are done with everything being broad brush..............DONE with it.


And, actually NO......would prefer it if you tampered your posts, which are mostly wordy vagueness, or declarative opinions,

anyhow.........you refuse to see an issue, and carry on.

So no, you need to take a step back and actually .....oh, you said it best....why bother.
Nope, it wasn't the topic being discussed on this thread, which was about the DOJ and CRT and "domestic terrorism".

But if you want to raise it again, go ahead. We'd talked about it a few days ago on a different thread...waiting to learn more, but it wasn't being discussed in the immediate string of posts above. And obviously not.

I'm not sure who you are saying is being physically threatened...are you saying there are people doing so to Loudon County BD members?

I was NOT calling the father of child he claimed had been raped a "terrorist". Nope...that was you conflating.

[ggait]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

Harvard College, Harvard Law School, SCOTUS clerk, DC Court of Appeals judge. Identical credentials to John Roberts and Merrick Garland.

Same/better credentials than the other SCOTUS judges.

As I posted before, there are TONS of people with these qualifications and they come in all colors, genders and ideologies. So it was completely ridiculous for right winger trolls to suggest that designating a black/woman somehow meant you had to cut corners on qualifications.

You only need to cut the corners on credentials if you are looking for activist conservative judges who also check some diversity boxes.

[jhu72]

Despite her overwhelmingly excellent qualifications, she is likely to be opposed by 46 or more Senators. Looks like Collins may be only "likely" GOP vote, though Murkowski is probably a yes. Graham is grousing...

How vigorously the GOP/Fox et al oppose her is the only question...

She should be 97+ vote yes, and would have been in less partisan days.

If the Republicans were smart, they'd give her a respectful hearing and then give her a very strong majority thumbs up. But too many have their heads up their...

From Newsweek: However, the Republican National Committee called Jackson "a radical, left-wing activist," accusing her of advocating for terrorists.


ok

... Graham is a little old lady. Upset because he didn't get to pick the candidate.

... agree it would be smart for the republicons to vote for her big time. But they won't. Gotta keep their base small, manageable size.

[jhu72]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

Harvard College, Harvard Law School, SCOTUS clerk, DC Court of Appeals judge. Identical credentials to John Roberts and Merrick Garland.

Same/better credentials than the other SCOTUS judges.

As I posted before, there are TONS of people with these qualifications and they come in all colors, genders and ideologies. So it was completely ridiculous for right winger trolls to suggest that designating a black/woman somehow meant you had to cut corners on qualifications.

You only need to cut the corners on credentials if you are looking for activist conservative judges who also check some diversity boxes.

... you are kidding. A black women as good or better. Nah, unpossible.

[Farfromgeneva]

Re: Biden Admin Fascism
Edit Report Quote
Post by MDlaxfan76 » Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:14 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:09 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:56 pm
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:43 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 22, 2021 12:21 pm
kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:42 am
The Biden DoJ: Conflating irate parents and domestic terrorists:

https://www.ocpathink.org/post/school-b ... rs-respond


Wow, what a load.

Incredibly slanted, a pile of BS.

There are actual acts and threats of violence and intimidation, in-person and online, that are correctly considered to be "terrorist" in nature. The intent is to scare people into submission, changing policy.

Simply being ill-informed is not. Having a dumb opinion is not. But fomenting violence and intimidation, and those who take the next steps to do so, is indeed a serious problem.

This isn't simply "contentious" meetings, it's actual threats against school board members and their families.
You just summed up your entire take on this situation.

A child was raped....

a child was raped in a Loudon County school building

The perp.......was shipped off to another school building, instead of "jail".

The perp.........raped ANOTHER child in a Loundon County school building.

child victim DAD attends school board meeting

Folks working on behest of the Loundon cty schools have NO idea what this guy , angry dad, is talking.

These are the facts......and you call OTHERS misinformed ?

You must have sided with Mikey Duke, when asked about rape. ..........

just wow.

why bother.......
Again, different topic rrr...but hey, you got me to react, which probably is your only objective.

actually, no, it IS not a different topic. Scott Smith and the Loudon cty school board "terror" IS the topic at hand. geez.

We are done with everything being broad brush..............DONE with it.


And, actually NO......would prefer it if you tampered your posts, which are mostly wordy vagueness, or declarative opinions,

anyhow.........you refuse to see an issue, and carry on.

So no, you need to take a step back and actually .....oh, you said it best....why bother.
Nope, it wasn't the topic being discussed on this thread, which was about the DOJ and CRT and "domestic terrorism".

But if you want to raise it again, go ahead. We'd talked about it a few days ago on a different thread...waiting to learn more, but it wasn't being discussed in the immediate string of posts above. And obviously not.

I'm not sure who you are saying is being physically threatened...are you saying there are people doing so to Loudon County BD members?

I was NOT calling the father of child he claimed had been raped a "terrorist". Nope...that was you conflating.

Desperate to catch you in anything. It’s ridiculous .

[Farfromgeneva]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

Harvard College, Harvard Law School, SCOTUS clerk, DC Court of Appeals judge. Identical credentials to John Roberts and Merrick Garland.

Same/better credentials than the other SCOTUS judges.

As I posted before, there are TONS of people with these qualifications and they come in all colors, genders and ideologies. So it was completely ridiculous for right winger trolls to suggest that designating a black/woman somehow meant you had to cut corners on qualifications.

You only need to cut the corners on credentials if you are looking for activist conservative judges who also check some diversity boxes.

I wasn’t looking for problems I was interested in knowing what made this one stand out. Like an applicant for Harvard in the first place one has to exhibit some other exceptional qualities or specific idiosyncrasies. I presume the handful of lifetime Supreme Court seats you have to be more than having a nice CV.

Landmark cases, unique appeoaches to important issues, etc

[Typical Lax Dad]

Re: Biden Admin Fascism
Edit Report Quote
Post by MDlaxfan76 » Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:14 pm

runrussellrun wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 3:09 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:56 pm
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Mon Oct 25, 2021 2:43 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 22, 2021 12:21 pm
kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Oct 22, 2021 11:42 am
The Biden DoJ: Conflating irate parents and domestic terrorists:

https://www.ocpathink.org/post/school-b ... rs-respond


Wow, what a load.

Incredibly slanted, a pile of BS.

There are actual acts and threats of violence and intimidation, in-person and online, that are correctly considered to be "terrorist" in nature. The intent is to scare people into submission, changing policy.

Simply being ill-informed is not. Having a dumb opinion is not. But fomenting violence and intimidation, and those who take the next steps to do so, is indeed a serious problem.

This isn't simply "contentious" meetings, it's actual threats against school board members and their families.
You just summed up your entire take on this situation.

A child was raped....

a child was raped in a Loudon County school building

The perp.......was shipped off to another school building, instead of "jail".

The perp.........raped ANOTHER child in a Loundon County school building.

child victim DAD attends school board meeting

Folks working on behest of the Loundon cty schools have NO idea what this guy , angry dad, is talking.

These are the facts......and you call OTHERS misinformed ?

You must have sided with Mikey Duke, when asked about rape. ..........

just wow.

why bother.......
Again, different topic rrr...but hey, you got me to react, which probably is your only objective.

actually, no, it IS not a different topic. Scott Smith and the Loudon cty school board "terror" IS the topic at hand. geez.

We are done with everything being broad brush..............DONE with it.


And, actually NO......would prefer it if you tampered your posts, which are mostly wordy vagueness, or declarative opinions,

anyhow.........you refuse to see an issue, and carry on.

So no, you need to take a step back and actually .....oh, you said it best....why bother.
Nope, it wasn't the topic being discussed on this thread, which was about the DOJ and CRT and "domestic terrorism".

But if you want to raise it again, go ahead. We'd talked about it a few days ago on a different thread...waiting to learn more, but it wasn't being discussed in the immediate string of posts above. And obviously not.

I'm not sure who you are saying is being physically threatened...are you saying there are people doing so to Loudon County BD members?

I was NOT calling the father of child he claimed had been raped a "terrorist". Nope...that was you conflating.

Desperate to catch you in anything. It’s ridiculous .

A phony….

[Peter Brown]

Once again, I shall provide the rare voice of reason here.

Listen to her speech today, worth your time:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH9JxBKQ32g

Judge Brown is a very likable person, with an exemplary family situation. I particularly like the facts that her own parents have been married 54 years, she 29, and that she has children (most SCOTUS libs tend to not be married nor parents: Souter, Kagan, Sotomajor, ).

I like that she has faith, which she mentioned. I like that she mentioned how grateful she is to be an American. These are good things. It won’t change her votes, but it will endear her later on to the conservatives of the court.

She won’t be rejected in this vote and no one will make a stink , so stop getting yo panties in a bunch. Sheesh.

And, obviously she might not get every Republican vote, but it doesn’t matter. So chill with who votes or doesn’t for her,

Judge Brown will vote exactly like Breyer…there isn’t a hair’s difference in their view of the law nor in the groups that will pay her the big $$$ for private speeches to supplant her SCOTUS income (which is how they all become rich). Whatever the farthest left of the DNC wants is how she will vote. Her academic and judicial career at this stage are beyond meaningless other than to give libs more reasons to love her. Fair enough.

Libs on SCOTUS vote strictly in accordance with the DNC; you can accurately predict every vote of theirs. And before any nutjob tells me otherwise, sell that horseschide to someone else. They do and everyone knows it. The US Constitution to liberal justices is a nuisance, not law.

There’s a process for a nominee and I wouldn’t care if it took a day or three months. Breyer isn’t going anywhere til October anyway. If I were Republicans in the Senate, I’d ask some brief questions, but I wouldn’t make them difficult nor long. She’s getting in regardless what you do, so all you can do is hurt yourself. Her votes will be that of the far left, but so were Breyer’s. And naturally, no Republican will concoct phony tales of rape as the Dems did to Kavanaugh, or claiming Coney is evil because she’s religious, simply trying to degrade the nominee. Those BS games are for Democrats.

The real game now is ultimately to replace Thomas with a younger version of himself, and possibly Sotomajor if her health continues to deteriorate.

Next.

[seacoaster]

You really are as dumb as a thumbtack and a lot less useful.

[AOD]

I read maybe one piece on the lady. I’m sure there’s politics involved but do people who really pay attention and aren’t just hysterical in either direction have any critical (not necessarily negative) observations of her candidacy?

Harvard College, Harvard Law School, SCOTUS clerk, DC Court of Appeals judge. Identical credentials to John Roberts and Merrick Garland.

Same/better credentials than the other SCOTUS judges.

As I posted before, there are TONS of people with these qualifications and they come in all colors, genders and ideologies. So it was completely ridiculous for right winger trolls to suggest that designating a black/woman somehow meant you had to cut corners on qualifications.

You only need to cut the corners on credentials if you are looking for activist conservative judges who also check some diversity boxes.

And more years on the bench at the time of her nomination than Thomas, Roberts, Kagan and Barrett COMBINED.