Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

If Supreme Court Vacancy Opens Up This Summer, Expect Liberal Freakout

If Supreme Court Vacancy Opens Up This Summer, Expect Liberal Freakout

“Trump reportedly plans to fill any vacancy from a hand-picked list of conservative jurists”

The liberal freakout over the recent confirmation of Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court was just a preview. If another vacancy opens up this summer, we’ll see the main attraction.

And just so you know, there is already talk of another vacancy.

Max Greenwood writes at The Hill:

Grassley: There will be a Supreme Court vacancy this year

A top GOP senator is predicting another vacancy on the Supreme Court this year.

“Every year you get these rumors. Somebody’s going to quit. Everybody looking – ‘Have they hired their clerks?’ Etcetera, etcetera. You know, are they sick or something?” Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said on C-SPAN’s “Newsmakers.”

“I don’t know who it’s going to be, but I think we’re going to have [a vacancy] yet this year,” he added.

Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he did not know of any particular justice who was planning to leave the court, saying only that he had “just heard rumors, no name attached to it.”

The Iowa Republican has made a similar prediction before, saying last month that he expected one of the justices to resign sometime this summer.

The whispers have already begun. Ryan Lovelace of the Washington Examiner:

Rumors of Supreme Court vacancy spark liberal panic

The potential for another Supreme Court vacancy coming open later this year appears to have liberals panicking.

Rumors of Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement have swirled for months but recently reached a fever pitch inside the Beltway. Shortly after the presidential election in November, the Supreme Court shot down speculation that Kennedy would leave the high court this year. But Republican Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Chuck Grassley of Iowa, both Senate Judiciary Committee members, have said that they expect another vacancy this summer.

Elizabeth Wydra, president of the liberal Constitutional Accountability Center, wrote an opinion piece this week urging, “Justice Kennedy, don’t abandon your legacy.”

“In the Trump era — with a Senate confirmation process now subject to a simple majority vote, thanks to McConnell and Senate Republicans — it is impossible to imagine any stronger or more able steward of Justice Kennedy’s legacy than Kennedy himself,” Wydra wrote. “Despite all the pressure and pointed rumors of his retirement, he surely realizes this.

This won’t end well for the left.

Joseph P. Williams of U.S. News and World Report:

Trump: Next Supreme Court Nominee Will Come From Conservative List

Responding to rumors that a senior justice on the U.S. Supreme Court could step down this summer, President Donald Trump reportedly plans to fill any vacancy from a hand-picked list of conservative jurists compiled by a pair of powerful Washington think tanks and delivered to him during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump told The Washington Times on Sunday he’s heard chatter about the possible retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy, a member of the court’s five-member conservative bloc but who sometimes sides with his liberal colleagues. If Kennedy leaves, Trump said, he’ll pick a replacement from the 21-member list of jurists given to him by the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society.

Get ready for more marches and theatrics from liberals when this happens, not that they’ll be able to do much about it.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

casualobserver | May 14, 2017 at 3:04 pm

This is a peferctly serious question:

How will we be able to tell there is some “new” freakout from the Dems or the media (same people, really)? The hysteria and hypcorisy is already at a 10. Will they pull a Spinal Tap and push it to 11 or higher?

Steady and unrelenting freakout is pretty much the norm and the only strategy they have.

rabid wombat | May 14, 2017 at 3:04 pm

Two reasons I voted for Trump (many I preferred ahead of him)

“Trump reportedly plans to fill any vacancy from a hand-picked list of conservative jurists”

Not Hillary

    Eddie Baby in reply to rabid wombat. | May 14, 2017 at 10:48 pm

    Trump’s nominations will be better than anyone Hillary would pick. You can always slap a mouthy NeverTrumper upside the head with that fact.

How beautiful will it be if Trump gets to replace 3 justices (assuming Kennedy this year and Ginnsburg soon after (but definitely before 2020!).

    Humphrey's Executor in reply to mailman. | May 14, 2017 at 5:41 pm

    Dems were calling on Ginsberg to retire for years under Obama. They will go ape if Trump gets to replace her with a conservative.

    mariner in reply to mailman. | May 15, 2017 at 1:16 am

    It won’t be beautiful unless those brilliant conservative jurists act like it.

casualobserver,
Expect the volume to go to 11. Never underestimate stupidity and their ability to hurt you and themselves when they can.

Nuclear.

Period.

I could care less about the shrieking of the progs.

    I care. It’s entertaining. Watching them pile their credibility up, pour on the gasoline, and flinging in a match never grows old.

    Soon, we will be the old reliable “Shooting a 200 million dollar propaganda movie that only brings in 1 million dollars in ticket sales” and “Very Important Hollywood Type decides to run for the Senate and blows a few hundred million of his/her own money only to come in seventeenth.”

    Fun times.

brightlights | May 14, 2017 at 3:35 pm

I would like to see “Supreme Court Justice Ted Cruz”.

Not only will it drive liberals bonkers but it lets the Texas gov appoint a seat filler that could run in the next election.

    Mannie in reply to brightlights. | May 15, 2017 at 9:25 am

    I’m not so fond of Cruz as a Justice. The Supremes are an extremely collegial bunch. Ginsburg and Scalia were best of friends. The justices write parts of each others’ opinions. Cruz is not collegial. Even his allies hate him.

      That’s because he’s a Constitutional purist in the Senate, where that “August” body likes to ignore the fact that the Constitution exists whenever it suits them, and he’s ready to call out others when they abandon their Oath.

      On the SCOTUS, he would be a force of nature regarding writing on Constitutional limits. I truly couldn’t care less if the Justices get along. The Constitution has been treated as a suggestion, rather than a binding government document.

Rumors are starting to swirl around the swamp that Kennedy may not decide to retire this year. Because of the firing of Comey, Kennedy may decide to stay on. Of course, this is all fueled by the state controlled media and we all know how they like to put out fake news.

a hand-picked list of conservative jurists

Imagine that, a “hand-picked” list. What other kind is there? Even if names are drawn from a hat, they’re still hand-picked.

I don’t see anything much in Kennedy’s history which would make me suspect him to be the type to go ballistic over a fake political crisis. He’s a Reagan-era relic, and at 80 his steam pressure must be getting pretty low, despite the fanciful demands of liberal politics. I doubt that leftoid hysteria over an FBI director would cause him to change his plans (whatever they are).

The seismic replacement would be Ginzburg, who isn’t a judge at all, but rather a robo-voter who invariably favors the supremacy of arbitrary Federal power. And arbitrary Federal power is the last refuge of liberals and such scoundrels.

    Liz in reply to tom swift. | May 14, 2017 at 5:47 pm

    nit·pick·ing

    ADJECTIVE
    looking for small or unimportant errors or faults, especially in order to criticize unnecessarily:

    “a nitpicking legalistic exercise”

If the vacancy comes after November 2017, are the Ds going to say that we should wait until after the 2108 election to let the new group of senators do the advise and consent?

    murkyv in reply to Liz. | May 14, 2017 at 11:20 pm

    That was the first thing I thought of when I read this article.

    I think we could bet on that being their line of attack.

    Ram one through regardless. They’ll use it as a campaign theme, but they will be screaming about something else anyway.

    If they don’t start hitting the thorazine soon and quit freaking out about everything, there’s a real possibilty the R’s could get a 60 seat Senate majority

Gremlin1974 | May 14, 2017 at 7:26 pm

“Justice Anthony Kennedy, a member of the court’s five-member conservative bloc”

Since when? Kennedy’s decision seem to be more based on if he liked his lunch than anything else.

Subotai Bahadur | May 14, 2017 at 10:02 pm

After the 1860 election, the southern states [Democrat ruled] seceded from the Union based not on anything that the Republican president [Lincoln] and the overwhelmingly Republican and Republican ally Congress had yet done at all. They seceded because they knew that anything that the Republicans wanted, they could do, so the Democrats left.

Right now, the Legislative Branch which was intended to be the most active branch of the government, has voluntarily yielded its powers to the Executive and the Courts; instead seeking regardless of party to maximize personal income. Members of the people’s House, the House of Representatives, are paid $174,000 a year. Out of that they have to live for part of the year in one of the most expensive cities in the country, and in theory have a residence for themselves and their families in their home districts.

Through some fiscal magic, the median net worth of members of the House [by reporting rules that understate worth] is well over a million dollars. It has been estimated that members of Congress actually make about $60,000 a day from various sources not available to the average citizen. It is good work if you can get it, and actually working for the country might interfere with that.

The real governance of the country is done by the Executive [now held by President Trump over the objection of both parties]and the courts. The confirmation of Gorsuch returned the balance to a shaky, albeit Left leaning status quo ante the death of Scalia. The replacement of a Leftist Justice by a conservative would create a shaky but conservative leaning rough balance. The replacement of a second Leftist would make it a conservative leaning court that might retain respect for the written texts of the Constitution and statutes, thus overturning the underlying basis of the Democrat Party. They live for the rule of men, not laws.

Faced with that, a third Supreme Court vacancy to be filled by Trump will most likely lead to pre-emptive violence, or more.

    The violence has already started. Antifa, BLM, Occupy, and other Democrat organized terror groups, have already resorted to it. Antifa, being their uniformed thug force, are not materially different from Mussolini’s Blackshirts. We can expect eight years, and possibly (hopefully) sixteen years of this.

    So?

    That’s why police are armed – and we have a national guard. And we have the NRA – and the right to bear arms.

    Let it fly and get it over with.

I have converted all of my IRA into popcorn futures . . .

I should be able to retire by November.

Word on the street says Schumer is consulting with Haitian voodoo shamans so he can keep RBG on the court as a zombie after she dies.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend