Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy Announces He Will Retire

[Ernst]

Justice Kennedy, U.S. Supreme Court's pivotal vote, to retire
Lawrence Hurley


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said on Wednesday he plans to retire after three decades as a pivotal vote on the highest U.S. judicial body, giving President Donald Trump an opportunity to make the court more firmly conservative.

“It has been the greatest honor and privilege to serve our nation in the federal judiciary for 43 years, 30 of those years on the Supreme Court,” Kennedy said in a statement.

The statement issued by the court said that Kennedy’s decision was motivated by his decision to spend more time with his family.

Kennedy is a traditional conservative who sometimes joined the liberal justices on key rulings, earning a reputation as the court’s “swing” vote who heartened conservatives and liberals alike, depending on the issue. Kennedy on Tuesday joined the court’s four other conservatives in giving Trump a huge legal victory by upholding the Republican president’s travel ban targeting people from several Muslim-majority countries.

Kennedy’s decision was disclosed on the final day of the court’s current term, which began in October. On Wednesday, he joined his fellow conservative justices in a 5-4 ruling that dealt a major setback to organized labor by shutting off a key union revenue source.

Trump on Wednesday said Kennedy had great vision and heart. The president said he will begin a search immediately for a new justice, with a list of 25 candidates. The Republican-led Senate can be expected to push to have the new nominee confirmed and on the court before the justices begin their next term in October.

Trump already has left an imprint on the court, restoring its 5-4 conservative majority with the appointment of Justice Neil Gorsuch last year after the president’s fellow Republicans in the Senate in 2016 refused to consider Democratic former President Barack Obama’s nominee, Merrick Garland.

While Kennedy’s replacement will not change the numerical ideological balance on the court, Trump could appoint a justice who would be more staunchly conservative than Kennedy and less likely to occasionally side with the court’s liberal wing.

MAJOR SOCIAL ISSUES
Without Kennedy on the bench, the high court could move to the right on major social issues including abortion and gay rights. Kennedy wrote the landmark 2015 ruling that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.

Conservative activists have long dreamed of building a firmly conservative majority on the court that would push to overturn the landmark 1973 ruling in the case Roe v. Wade that legalized abortion nationwide.

Kennedy disappointed conservatives by joining Supreme Court decisions that affirmed the Roe decision, including a landmark 1992 ruling in the case Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

Gorsuch already has demonstrated that he is one of the most conservative members of the court, aligning himself with Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

The U.S. Senate, which must confirm nominees before they can join the court, is controlled 51-49 by Trump’s fellow Republicans, meaning that if they remain unified they can overcome any Democratic opposition like that mounted against Gorsuch. Senate Republicans changed the chamber’s rules during the Gorsuch nomination battle to prevent Democrats from insisting on a 60-vote super-majority, allowing court nominees to win confirmation by a simple majority vote.

Trump picked Gorsuch from a list of names, mostly conservative federal appeals court judges, he circulated during his 2016 election campaign. The White House last November issued an expanded list that includes other prominent conservatives, including Judge Brett Kavanagh, a former Kennedy law clerk who serves on the U.S. appeals court in Washington.

While Kennedy sided with conservative colleagues on many issues and authored the landmark 2010 ruling that allowed unlimited corporate spending in political campaigns, his tenure also included strong support for the liberal cause of gay rights.

Kennedy, mild-mannered and professorial, followed a thoughtful, middle-of-the-road approach and often posed probing, intellectual questions of lawyers arguing cases. He became the swing vote on the ideologically divided court after fellow centrist conservative Justice Sandra Day O’Connor retired in 2006.

Kennedy was Reagan’s third choice to fill the court seat left open by the retirement of Lewis Powell in 1987. The Senate rejected Reagan’s first nominee, outspoken conservative Robert Bork, in a fierce partisan fight and second choice Douglas Ginsburg withdrew after admitting to past marijuana use.

Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Editing by Will Dunham

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1JN2OF

[Beetlegeuse]

The reason that the election of POTUS45 was so critical is that the actuarial tables made it better than even money that if he serves out two consecutive terms, owing to the ages of the SCOTUS judges, he would get to appoint at least four replacements. This makes two down, leaving two to go. The oldest remaining SCOTUSes are Ginsburg and Breyer, and both of them are so far left you could replace them with V.I. Lenin and Leon Trotsky and no one would notice. Ginsburg would have to make 91 to survive the Trump administration and she has been sickly and fighting cancer for years. This Darth Bader can't live forever (Insh'Allah!).

If The Donald appoints a rock-ribbed conservative to replace Kennedy, this will be the first solid conservative majority on the Supreme Court since 1934. If POTUS45 appoints a further two more conservatives (or even near-conservatives) look for a drive to have the court revisit Roe-v-Wade, which probably was the worst considered and most tortured decision in SCOTUS history.

[Beetlegeuse]

This shows you why we so desperately need more strict constructionists (i.e., conservatives) on SCOTUS.

I copied this verbatim from the US Code at Cornell.edu.

8 U.S. Code § 1182 - Inadmissible aliens

(f) Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President

Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.

Title 8 U.S. Code §§ 1182 (f)). POTUS has the authority to keep anyone and everyone out of the country who he thinks might bring harm to America. Unilaterally and without limitation, equivocation or qualification. Period. Full stop. It's been law of the land since 1952.


So explain to me how four alleged "jurists" could interpret this clause to mean "unless he has spoken ill of Muslims in campaign speeches prior to assuming the office of president." But that's exactly what the silly fucks did.

[PT1982]

WooHOO!

[guitarzan]

WooHOO!

...x2

[EndlessApex]

Yes, this is good & today is the day we find out who will be the Presidents pick! Think Ginsburg is the next to go

[PeanutbutterDC]

Yes, this is good & today is the day we find out who will be the Presidents pick! Think Ginsburg is the next to go

I hope not! Attachment 173393

[Beetlegeuse]

The Second Amendment Foundation's Alan Gottlibb has endorsed Trump's nomination to SCOTUS, Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh's most significant 2A opinion was a dissent to an opinion upholding DC's ban on semi-auto rifles and registration requirement for handguns:

In Heller, the Supreme Court held that handguns – the vast majority of which today are semi-automatic – are constitutionally protected because they have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens. There is no meaningful or persuasive constitutional distinction between semi-automatic handguns and semiautomatic rifles. Semi-automatic rifles, like semi-automatic handguns, have not traditionally been banned and are in common use by law-abiding citizens for self-defense in the home, hunting, and other lawful uses. Moreover, semiautomatic handguns are used in connection with violent crimes far more than semi-automatic rifles are. It follows from Heller’s protection of semi-automatic handguns that semi-automatic rifles are also constitutionally protected and that D.C.’s ban on them is unconstitutional. (By contrast, fully automatic weapons, also known as machine guns, have traditionally been banned and may continue to be banned after Heller.)

Me likey.

[guitarzan]

I hope not! Attachment 173393

Cant open your attachment