Go Amy

[knoblock]

nm

 

[aix_xpert]

You thinking Barrett is the nominee, or is this referencing something else?

 

[knoblock]

You thinking Barrett is the nominee, or is this referencing something else?

Just hoping she is the nominee, nothing else.

 

[aix_xpert]

Just hoping she is the nominee, nothing else.

I wanted her just for the pretzels you could see the Dems do to try to attack her without being misogynistic. However, I'm not sure she's done her due time. She's only been a circuit judge for a year (or so I've read). I know she was a clerk prior and has the smarts. Just doesn't have a lot of history behind her.

 

[knoblock]

I wanted her just for the pretzels you could see the Dems do to try to attack her without being misogynistic. However, I'm not sure she's done her due time. She's only been a circuit judge for a year (or so I've read). I know she was a clerk prior and has the smarts. Just doesn't have a lot of history behind her.

Understandable but that is one of the reasons to like her. Be interesting to hear what @lawpoke87 @CowboyJD @hollywood and @janroc have to say. Obviously not long to the announcement but the confirmation of any nominee will be crazy.

 

[CowboyJD]

Understandable but that is one of the reasons to like her. Be interesting to hear what @lawpoke87 @CowboyJD @hollywood and @janroc have to say. Obviously not long to the announcement but the confirmation of any nominee will be crazy.

Not long on the bench. She faced a pretty tough confirmation hearing the first time.

I like that she didn’t go to Yale or Harvard law school. We already have too many of those on the bench.

She seems to hold less respect for the notion of stare decisis than I do. She’s politically conservative, but not exactly conservative jurisprudentially because of that. She has a bit of judicial activism in her, IMO.

Pretty easy on the eyes.

 

[aix_xpert]

Not long on the bench. She faced a pretty tough confirmation hearing the first time.

I like that she didn’t go to Yale or Harvard law school. We already have too many of those on the bench.

She seems to hold less respect for the notion of stare decisis than I do. She’s politically conservative, but not exactly conservative jurisprudentially because of that. She has a bit of judicial activism in her, IMO.

Pretty easy on the eyes.

This is pretty much my own read of her, and I'm less of a fan. Precedent should matter.

 

[HighStickHarry]

Not long on the bench. She faced a pretty tough confirmation hearing the first time.

I like that she didn’t go to Yale or Harvard law school. We already have too many of those on the bench.

She seems to hold less respect for the notion of stare decisis than I do. She’s politically conservative, but not exactly conservative jurisprudentially because of that. She has a bit of judicial activism in her, IMO.

Pretty easy on the eyes.

Seven kids makes me picture her in all my favorite positions.

The Harvard/Yale thing is the true anti diversity of the Supreme Court.

 

[imprimis]

Save Amy for the Ruth Buzzie Ginsburg slot.

 

[CowboyJD]

This is pretty much my own read of her, and I'm less of a fan. Precedent should matter.

I PREDICT (take note @NZ Poke...this is what someone says when they are predict something) that if she is nominated, a big focus of her hearing will be her views on stare decisis vis-a-vis RvW.

I’m personally of the opinion that RvW created a constitutional right in a manner that wasn’t well thought out, but if you reject that reasoning at this point you raise serious questions about other “constitutional” rights found to exist under similar reasoning....including a right to birth control and parenting decisions. We can get into a pretty esoteric discussion of the RvW decision some time,maybe...but I would have gone with a 9th Amendment interpretation of “retained by the people” to apply to individual rights rather than state’s rights instead of the goofy “penumbra” analysis they did.

 

[CowboyJD]

The Harvard/Yale thing is the true anti diversity of the Supreme Court.

Especially when constitutionally you don’t even have to be a lawyer to qualify for the Supreme Court.

All nine justices right now are either Catholic or Jewish (6-3) (well Gorsuch raised Catholic and attends Episcopalian church which is basically Catholic lite).

 

[JimmyBob]

Especially when constitutionally you don’t even have to be a lawyer to qualify for the Supreme Court.

All nine justices right now are either Catholic or Jewish (6-3) (well Gorsuch raised Catholic and attends Episcopalian church which is basically Catholic lite).

Sounds like we need a good Creek County Baptist, but since that's rather oxymoronish, never mind.

 

[HighStickHarry]

Especially when constitutionally you don’t even have to be a lawyer to qualify for the Supreme Court.

All nine justices right now are either Catholic or Jewish (6-3) (well Gorsuch raised Catholic and attends Episcopalian church which is basically Catholic lite).

I didn’t know that. Interesting what qualifies for diversity and what doesn’t.