Justice Kennedy Resigning Soon via Roger Stone

[FSP-Rebel]

Supposedly Kennedy is going to be resigning imminently. Stone talks replacements, including The Judge. :eek:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KoZXNLSOC5g
Skip to 4:20

[Zippyjuan]

Kennedy retirement rumors have been circulating for years now. Eventually it will be true.

[Suzanimal]

Was Judge Nap on the list?:confused:


Mr. Trump said he has heard rumors that one of the justices will retire when the current court session ends in June but that he doesn’t have any inside knowledge.

“I don’t know. I have a lot of respect for Justice Kennedy, but I just don’t know,” Mr. Trump said, referring to the senior member of the bench, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.

“I don’t like talking about it. I’ve heard the same rumors that a lot of people have heard. And I have a lot of respect for that gentleman, a lot.”

Mr. Trump said conservative voters should be assured that his next choice will be “really talented and of our views.” Asked specifically whether he would pick from the list of candidates he put forward in the campaign, Mr. Trump was unequivocal: “Yes,” he said, adding, “That list was a big thing.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/30/trump-to-stick-with-conservative-list-for-next-sup/

[Suzanimal]

Not on the list but hopefully he'll change his mind.


The full list of the twenty-one individuals Mr. Trump will consider is below:

1. Keith Blackwell

2. Charles Canady

3. Steven Colloton

4. Allison Eid

5. Neil Gorsuch

6. Raymond Gruender

7. Thomas Hardiman

8. Raymond Kethledge

9. Joan Larsen

10. Mike Lee

11. Thomas Lee

12. Edward Mansfield

13. Federico Moreno

14. William Pryor

15. Margaret A. Ryan

16. Amul Thapar

17. Timothy Tymkovich

18. David Stras

19. Diane Sykes

20. Don Willett

21. Robert Young

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-adds-to-list-of-potential-supreme-court-justice-picks

[Jan2017]

A pre-midterm Supreme Court vacancy . . .

CNN: Friends seem to think Anthony Kennedy will retire no later than next summer

Liberals can get angry enough about it to try to hand the Senate back to Chuck Schumer.
The politics of a pre-midterm vacancy could be volatile.

http://hotair.com/archives/2017/05/01/cnn-friends-seem-think-anthony-kennedy-will-retire-no-later-next-summer/

[donnay]

Was Judge Nap on the list?:confused:



http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/30/trump-to-stick-with-conservative-list-for-next-sup/

It has been said he and Judge Nap are friends, and he was 2nd on his list of considerations after Gorsuch. I truly hope it comes to pass.

[jllundqu]

Can you imagine the explosions of leftist heads if Kennedy retired and Trump nominated The Judge?! Man I would pay bucks for that...

[shakey1]

Can you imagine the explosions of leftist heads if Kennedy retired and Trump nominated The Judge?! Man I would pay bucks for that...

https://i0.wp.com/ariasfilms.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Simpsons_THX.gif?resize=480%2C360

[TheTexan]

Not on the list but hopefully he'll change his mind.



https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-adds-to-list-of-potential-supreme-court-justice-picks

Yes, that seems like a realistic expectation

[Suzanimal]

It has been said he and Judge Nap are friends, and he was 2nd on his list of considerations after Gorsuch. I truly hope it comes to pass.

How many lists are there?:confused:

[donnay]

How many lists are there?:confused:

The list you posted, in my opinion, is a list for the opposition to start scrutinizing so that Trump can catch them off guard. Gorsuch was fifth on that list.

[Zippyjuan]

The list you posted, in my opinion, is a list for the opposition to start scrutinizing so that Trump can catch them off guard. Gorsuch was fifth on that list.

(noting that the list was alphabetical).

Link to any list including Napolitano?


http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/andrew-napolitano-supreme-court-shortlist-trump-236488


Napolitano told friends he was on Trump's Supreme Court shortlist




Friends warned Napolitano not to take the president too literally – or seriously. “He'll take your call and invite you to the Oval Office, but he just wants you to say nice things about him on TV,” the source says he told Napolitano at the time. But that didn’t sink the ambitious judge’s hopes.

Trump released a list of potential replacements for the late Justice Antonin Scalia before the election, vowing to select Scalia’s replacement from that list — and followed through, tapping Tenth Circuit judge Neil Gorsuch for the nomination in January. Napolitano’s name did not appear on any public list.


People familiar with the president’s thinking dismissed the idea that Napolitano is being considered for a Supreme Court nomination. “The president already has a list of highly qualified contenders for future SCOTUS openings, and Judge Napolitano is not on it,” said a person close to the White House.

[dannno]

(noting that the list was alphabetical).

Link to any list including Napolitano?

Why on earth would Trump send out the real list?

[Zippyjuan]

Why on earth would Trump send out the real list?

If it was fake, his choice should have been somebody not on the list. But it was. It is "fake" because you don't see what you would like to see.

[donnay]

(noting that the list was alphabetical).

Link to any list including Napolitano?



Judge Andrew Napolitano of Fox News fame reportedly told confidants that President Donald Trump is considering appointing him to the Supreme Court, should another vacancy arise during his administration.
http://dailycaller.com/2017/03/26/people-are-saying-judge-napolitano-was-on-scotus-list/


Trump released a list of potential replacements for the late Justice Antonin Scalia before the election, vowing to select Scalia’s replacement from that list — and followed through, tapping Tenth Circuit judge Neil Gorsuch for the nomination in January. Napolitano’s name did not appear on any public list.
http://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/andrew-napolitano-supreme-court-shortlist-trump-236488

[CPUd]

That's the list from Heritage. He said during the campaign he would use that list.

[Zippyjuan]

That's the list from Heritage. He said during the campaign he would use that list.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/how_the_federalist_society_became_the_de_facto_sel ector_of_republican_supreme.html


Federalist Court

How the Federalist Society became the de facto selector of Republican Supreme Court justices.

During last year’s campaign, Donald Trump offered an unprecedented guarantee regarding any potential Supreme Court nomination. The Republican nominee promised that, if he were elected president, his judicial nominees would “all picked by the Federalist Society.” Trump likewise acknowledged he had turned to the “Federalist people”[B] and the Heritage Foundation to assemble a list of 21 potential Supreme Court nominees. Shortly after becoming president-elect, he met with the society’s executive vice president, Leonard Leo, to discuss the evaluation process for selecting a nominee to fill the seat that belonged to Antonin Scalia. On Tuesday, President Trump is expected to announce in a prime-time televised event which judge on the Federalist Society’s list is his Supreme Court pick.

Whoever Trump chooses will not simply be vetted by the Federalist Society; that nominee will be a Federalist Society loyalist—as he explicitly said, a Federalist “pick.” Nine of the 21 names on the short list that was released in September and formed the pool of potential selections spoke at the 2016 Federalist Society annual convention a week after the election—prompting USA Today to call the convention an “audition” for “Supreme Court wannabes.” Whether or not they are members, nearly all the 21 are listed as “experts” on the society’s website. Three appeals court judges who are considered top contenders—Thomas Hardiman, William Pryor, and Neil Gorsuch—are Federalist Society members who regularly speak at society events. Pryor, for example, has spoken at every annual convention since 2006.


Ever since the 1991 nomination of Thomas to the Supreme Court, Republican nominees have been conservative and connected to the Federalist Society.

On the Federalist Society group:
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/17/the-conservative-pipeline-to-the-supreme-court


Within just a few years, the group was embraced and funded by a number of powerful, wealthy conservative organizations, which eventually included foundations associated with John Olin, Lynde and Harry Bradley, Richard Scaife, and the Koch brothers. “The funders all got the idea right away—that you can win elections, you can have mass mobilizations, but unless you can change élites and the institutions that are by and large controlled by the élites, like the courts, there are limits to what you can do,” Amanda Hollis-Brusky, a professor of politics at Pomona College and the author of “Ideas with Consequences,” a study of the Federalist Society, said. “The idea was to train, credential, and socialize a generation of alternative élites.”

[donnay]

That's the list from Heritage. He said during the campaign he would use that list.

That was the list for the replacement of Scalia.

[eleganz]

Nap I think might be a little too old given how polarized everything has become lately. If he wants a shot, he better start some stem cell trials.

Massie was right, the Supreme Court is worth the entire election. Would anybody here prefer a Clinton nominee? Senate can't block the Supreme Court for 4-8 years longer, can they?

[Zippyjuan]

Nap I think might be a little too old given how polarized everything has become lately. If he wants a shot, he better start some stem cell trials.

Massie was right, the Supreme Court is worth the entire election. Would anybody here prefer a Clinton nominee? Senate can't block the Supreme Court for 4-8 years longer, can they?

Not since they changed the rules to get Gorsuch through. It used to take 2/3rds to approve. They changed it to 50% just for Gorsuch. Now the minority party has no say on the approval process. (That will be true for Republicans when they return to the minority again some time in the future).

[jllundqu]

The Judge would be great, but he has given many speeches talking about the war of northern aggression, etc... He would be THE BEST SCOTUS justice, but would never pass public scrutiny.

[CPUd]

Speaking of Heritage, looks like they are trying to make room for more Trumpertarians:



Statement From the Chairman of Heritage’s Board of Trustees

Thomas A. Saunders III, chairman of The Heritage Foundation’s Board of Trustees, released the following statement about a leadership change at the organization:

The Heritage Foundation’s Board of Trustees, by a unanimous vote, has asked for and received the resignation of Jim DeMint as president and CEO of the organization. The Board elected Heritage Founder Ed Feulner as president and CEO while we conduct a thorough search for his successor.

After a comprehensive and independent review of the entire Heritage organization, the Board determined there were significant and worsening management issues that led to a breakdown of internal communications and cooperation. While the organization has seen many successes, Jim DeMint and a handful of his closest advisers failed to resolve these problems.

This was a difficult and necessary decision for the Board to take. As trustees, we have governance and oversight responsibilities for this organization and our 500,000 members. We were compelled to take action.

Heritage has never been about one individual, but rather the power of conservative ideas. Heritage is bigger than any one person.

As Chairman of the Board, I wholeheartedly endorse this change. It will make Heritage stronger in the short term and the long run.

Heritage is a permanent policy research institution fighting for conservative ideas, as Ed Feulner often reminds us. We remain committed, as ever, to the principles that have made America great: free enterprise; limited government; individual freedom; traditional American values; and a strong national defense. This will continue under the leadership of Ed and his successor.

Feulner led Heritage for more than three decades and returns to our organization after serving on President Trump’s transition team. There is no one better to guide the ship while we seek our new leader and continue to push for conservative ideas and policies in Washington and around the nation.

As conservatives, we have a tremendous opportunity ahead of us to restore the principles of the American founding. You and the 500,000 Americans who donate to support Heritage have played a crucial role in making our work possible, and I look forward to working with you in the future. As we move forward, the Board of Trustees will be seeking your thoughts and input about our search for the next leader of Heritage.

Thanks to your support, our scholars have shaped public policy in a firmly conservative direction for the last 44 years and will continue to do so in the future.

I regret not being able to let you know sooner about this change. While we were trying to resolve this matter amicably, we honored our side of the bargain to remain silent.

I wanted to ensure that the Board’s decision was final before alerting you. Unfortunately, the media ran with speculation about this story before the facts could be disclosed. As a loyal Heritage supporter, I hope that you will understand the reasons that compelled these changes and stand with us in this time of transition.

Thank you for all your support and dedication to the conservative cause.

Sincerely,

Thomas A. Saunders III
Chairman, Board of Trustees
The Heritage Foundation

http://www.heritage.org/article/statement-the-chairman-heritages-board-trustees

[dannno]

If it was fake, his choice should have been somebody not on the list. But it was. It is "fake" because you don't see what you would like to see.

Uh, no, it was fake because the other choices provided a distraction and it didn't include a potential future nominee.

[Zippyjuan]

Uh, no, it was fake because the other choices provided a distraction and it didn't include a potential future nominee.

Gorsuch was not a future nominee at the time of the list? What is your proof that nobody else on the list was under consideration? Who is on the "real" "potential future nominee" list?

[dannno]

Gorsuch was not a future nominee at the time of the list?

LOL, so you think he is going to choose Gorsuch next time even though he is already on the SCOTUS?



What is your proof that nobody else on the list was under consideration? Who is on the "real" "potential future nominee" list?

Trump has books about this sorta stuff, you never lay your cards out on the table before you have to.

[Zippyjuan]

LOL, so you think he is going to choose Gorsuch next time even though he is already on the SCOTUS?



Trump has books about this sorta stuff, you never lay your cards out on the table before you have to.

I see. You know the list must be fake but have no idea who the real nominees are.

[dannno]

I see. You know the list must be fake but have no idea who the real nominees are.


Ya, see Trump has this thing called the "short list" that nobody else can see but him. It very well may only exist in his head. Sorry if you haven't worked much in the private sector with successful businessmen, but this is how they operate.

I would say the Judge is on the short list along with a few people from the Heritage list - the rest are a distraction.

[Zippyjuan]

Ya, see Trump has this thing called the "short list" that nobody else can see but him. It very well may only exist in his head. Sorry if you haven't worked much in the private sector with successful businessmen, but this is how they operate.

I would say the Judge is on the short list along with a few people from the Heritage list - the rest are a distraction.

If it is in his head you have no idea who is or isn't on it. You are only guessing (also guessing that he has such a list in his head). The published list has proven accurate so far.

[angelatc]

Not since they changed the rules to get Gorsuch through. It used to take 2/3rds to approve. They changed it to 50% just for Gorsuch. Now the minority party has no say on the approval process. (That will be true for Republicans when they return to the minority again some time in the future).

The Democrats changed the rules. I'd like to see the GOP have enough spine to abuse the hell out of it then change them back in a lame duck session, making it virtually impossible for the Dems to revert.

[Zippyjuan]

The Democrats changed the rules. I'd like to see the GOP have enough spine to abuse the hell out of it then change them back in a lame duck session, making it virtually impossible for the Dems to revert.

This one was the Republicans in the Senate changing the rules. https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/senate-poised-for-historic-clash-over-supreme-court-nominee-neil-gorsuch/2017/04/06/40295376-1aba-11e7-855e-4824bbb5d748_story.html?utm_term=.80296db6a691


Senate Republicans go ‘nuclear,’ pave the way for Gorsuch confirmation to Supreme Court

Republicans on Thursday cleared the way for Judge Neil Gorsuch to be confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court, overcoming a historic Democratic blockade by changing the rules of the U.S. Senate — a move that highlighted the fierce partisanship that has seized Congress.

The long-anticipated rules change now means that all presidential nominees for executive branch positions and the federal courts need only a simple-majority vote to be confirmed by senators.

The GOP decision to ram through the rules change is also likely to further divide an increasingly partisan Senate. Several senators openly fretted that eliminating the minority party’s right to block high court nominees could lead to the end of filibusters on legislation — effectively transforming the Senate’s traditional role in the legislative process as the slower, more deliberative chamber.

[CPUd]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LnCCxsDNKm4

[TheTexan]

I would say the Judge is on the short list along with a few people from the Heritage list - the rest are a distraction.

I think Nap has a lock for the spot. That short list, is a list of one. This was his plan all along, Gorsuch was just a distraction, to hide who his true #1 pick was.

[dannno]

This one was the Republicans in the Senate changing the rules. https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/senate-poised-for-historic-clash-over-supreme-court-nominee-neil-gorsuch/2017/04/06/40295376-1aba-11e7-855e-4824bbb5d748_story.html?utm_term=.80296db6a691

Using the state to minimize the state is no vice.

[Jan2017]

The Democrats changed the rules. I'd like to see the GOP have enough spine to abuse the hell out of it then change them back in a lame duck session, making it virtually impossible for the Dems to revert.

Harry Reid and Dims get bitten back in the arse by their nuclear option.

Schumer regrets Dems triggering 'nuclear option'

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) says he regrets the decision by Democrats in 2013 to trigger the "nuclear option" for most presidential nominations.
The change to the Senate rules lowered the threshold for confirming Cabinet nominees to a simple majority vote — something that will now help President-elect Donald Trump push through his nominees.

... "I argued against it at the time. I said both for Supreme Court and in Cabinet should be 60 ...
"I won on Supreme Court, lost on Cabinet. But it's what we have to live with now."

"The "nuclear option" was triggered by former Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who retired at the end of the last Congress.
Schumer is taking his place as leader of Senate Democrats in the new Congress.

Republicans to this day remain angry at Reid for the maneuver, but have praised Schumer, saying he sought to reach a compromise.

A Republican source last month told The Hill that Schumer worked for six months to prevent the nuclear options from being used.
With Republicans holding a 52-48 majority in the new Senate, they can push through Trump's nominees without Democratic support.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/312540-schumer-regrets-dems-triggering-nuclear-option

Senate could/should have left it at 60 for SCOTUS nominees . . . it would have been on Dims that Supreme Court nominations go nowhere.