Trump picks Brett Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court: NBC News

Well, what can you say other than looks like Trump is picking a Kennedy look alike and someone that is a more safe choice which won't have any problems getting through the nomination process

President Donald Trump has picked Brett M. Kavanaugh, a federal appeals court judge with extensive legal credentials and a lengthy political record, to succeed Justice Anthony M. Kennedy on the Supreme Court,

NBC News reported.Kavanaugh, 53, is an ideological conservative who is expected to push the court to the right on a number of issues including business regulation and national security.

But he is also considered a safer pick than some of the more partisan choices on the president’s shortlist.

What a job to be picked for, no matter what, he is now going to form the justice system for at least 3 decades.

This was the easy part, now the hard part begins in the chambers of Congress.

Don´t think this pick will be having to hard a time.

His pedigree is established as a true conservative and he also won´t be one that will go against precedence.

@Jacanuk: Yeah, there might be a dog and pony show, but he's as good as in. Just about any conservative judge would have been.

He still needs 50 senators so the vice president can break the tie. At least two Republicans are questionable and Senator McCain is still recovering from brain cancer.

Don´t think anyone will be as easy as this one, Trump took the very safe pick and a pick that would not lose any conservatives and would also put the Democrats up for re-election in Trump states between a rock and hard place.

The hardcore anti-trumps though like Sanders and Clinton will, of course, be against this, but Sanders also called Kavanaugh a white nationalist which is just far out there with no basis in reality.

From what I have heard so far from him, meh.

Yup, but I think this one will be picked like Gorsuch with a few democrats votes as well.

It will be another 53-54 - 45 for the pick.

I'm fine with it. I just wish Judges were voted in by people instead of picked by presidents. *shrugs*

Almost agree here.

Supreme court Justices should not be picked by the president nor should they be picked by the people, they should be separated from the people and from the political office of the president. They should also not have an "unlimited term" they should have a set limit and be picked by a professional selection committee where no party should have representatives but it should top-notch legal scholars.

It´s funny though how much the recent time with Kennedy and Scalia have shown how little we actually have our branches separated. I do not think any other country in the civilised western world has even a close resemblance to the disgrace that is our legal system.

People should be involved in some way.

McConnell agreed with you as recently as last year.

Why? This is our judicial branch and it should be a fair and impartial justice system that do not act as lawmakers or can be held hostage by any party.

But I think the UK selection committee seems like an excellent idea where there are legal scholars and "laymen"

I see your point and concede. :)

The People are involved, they vote for Electors who choose the President and said President nominate members to the SCOTUS. Nominees are confirmed to the SCOTUS with the advice and consent of the Senate, senators are elected by The People. More involvement!

It is called representative democracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-supreme-court-pick/2018/07/09/afa8ae36-83a0-11e8-8f6c-46cb43e3f306_story.html?utm_term=.c6dcc8d3b378

"Kavanaugh has since argued that presidents should not be distracted by civil lawsuits, criminal investigations, or even questions from a prosecutor or defense lawyer while in office."

There's the real reason.

Well, that is one opinion.

Also, notice how he does not says cannot, but clearly says "should not" meaning this is his opinion and he clearly knows that the law does not agree with that opinion.

So thank god we have justices who do not consider what they feel but what the law says.

I would guess one reason to not nominate Barrett now is to hold off her nomination for when/if RGB retires. It would be glorious.

Barrett would have a hard time getting picked, not to mention that she is a wild card, but yes I think Trump may be saving that card for when Ginsburg is retiring or Breyer.

Yeah he actually doesn't seem too bad...for a conservative. I don't really have a problem with true conservatives in light of what false conservatives (aka right wing nutjobs) are these days.

He upheld Roe v Wade, upheld a ruling saying meat packers should have to have country of origin on their packages, and so forth.

Yup, you know he is a conservative when even Bush W is out and praising the pick.

he doesnt have the votes on the question of Abortion and he will not be able to give a non-answer to the question

I predict he will not get confirmed

Well, they got 50 votes so i predict you will be wrong.

there is 2 on the republican side that will not vote for a 'pro-life' stance.

in fact, they are rather political about their position. Thus, GOP doesnt have the votes when the issue of abortion comes up and it will

One thing is what the two female senators say, another is what they will actually do.

But i predict this will be another Goursich situation, 54-45

they are pretty hard core about being pro-choice. I predict they will vote against this nominee (or vote to halt until after the midterms) unless he comes out and specifically says 'i would not support making abortion illegal'

and the left is going to throw everything they have pressure wise on these two ladies.

women who are afraid of not being able to have an abortion under any condition can become pretty motivated.

They will not halt this nomination until after the midterms, if they do they will get destroyed when they are up for re-election.

And Kavanaugh is not against Roe v Wade, neither should anyone ask him, it´s an absolute disgrace that any democrat want´s to go that route and compromise our whole judicial branch.

lol..that is funny actually

anyway...the women of the Left will be putting so much pressure that the only way those two will vote for this guy is if he EXPLICITLY STATES that he is against making abortion illegal.

this extreemly highly predictable tract of 'he isnt against it' 'because he has never ruled' isnt going to work, we on the left have already predicted that route easily, in fact we EXPECT it and your response to my claim was extreemly predictable.

so nothing short of his EXPLICITLY stating it will be acceptable...we are not as stupid as you think

They will never be able to figure out if he is for or against Roe V Wade. Even the reasonable left pundits knows this, i know the farleft nutjobs like Sanders and Warren will ask but they will only get the same response, "No comment" and that is it.

You do know right how insane it is that you and the far-left are actually ok with a judge being asked how he will view a judicial case? It compromises the whole integrity of the justice system.

read this carefully.

everyone on the Left ALREADY KNOWS the tactic. which is why people on the left will demand and explicit and clear answer to the question, if they do not get a clear and explicit answer they will vote no.

INCLUDING these two women on the right

PEROID

end

of

story

how stupid do you think we are?

a non-answer will be considered a vote for against.

I think you under-estimate how passionate women are about this subject. They are afraid that they might get pregnant is a situation that they didnt want and cant proove was rape. That is a HUGE motovator for them to get poltical

@tryit: Well , you have your opinion.

Thank god the relevant people are not as careless with our justice system as the far-left nutjobs.

just watch and learn.

my predictions are not always right but I have a pretty good success rate, how is your tract record on poltical predictions?

Well, we will see

But you can be sure that this justice will take this place when the supreme court comes back after the break.

that is your prediction, and my prediction is that he will not.

we have several months before we even get to a vote so there is that.

I would like the Supreme Court reverse Kelo vs New London.

its going to be about Roe vs Wade. The Right will try to make it not about that, they will try to say 'he never said he is against abortion' but the left will not accept anything short of a loud, clear answer, of which they will not get.

Thus the two pro-choice women on the right will likely vote against.

thing is, people on the Right do not understand how motivated women can be when they become afraid that if they get pregnant in a situation that is rape but they cant prove it becomes illegal, because getting pregnant is a big deal you know.

Well,

turns out votes do not require an explanation.

there is literally only two votes and one topic to watch on this entire subject

@Jacanuk

Senator Collins just said she will be asking about Roe vs Wade.

I didnt expect she would be the one to respond that she would be asking. this might turn out stronger even then I had thought.

Please link to that. Because in every single interview she have done so far i have heard, she said she would not ask about that. Nor would she expect a answer to it.

http://www.msnbc.com/craig-melvin/watch/senator-susan-collins-on-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-1273911363831

problem is however, the video link to the huge words 'Watch video

Sen. Collins on Kavanaugh: I’m going bring up Roe vs. Wade'

doesnt appear to actually be the correct video for that statement. so I will keep looking for somethign more solid for you.

here is one but its from July 1st, saying the same thing. not sure why this is news now and not several days ago

http://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/395053-collins-im-going-to-have-an-in-depth-discussion-with-scotus-pick

Hmm, surprised at this turn for her, but she is an old lady so maybe senility has hit her so she doesn´t remember what she previously said.

I guess not, for whatever that is worth which is nothing.

I see a lot of news articles stamped for July 1st which says she plans to ask away, which isnt a shocker at all.

I am sticking to my prediction and for the reasons I gave in detail

Well, that is not what she said on CNN , there she clearly stated that it would not be a proper question to ask.

ok well whatever, dont care.

not surprised remotely that this is her true position (one of asking).

so should I look up this quote you are referring to? I mean just for fun and all, because surely that quote would shed light for me and help me understand..right?

If Roe v Wade were repealed it would not end abortion it would then be up to the states write their abortion laws. Most states would approve abortion, however there may be laws when late term abortions may occur.

I know that, doesnt change what I am saying.

and as it turns out my prediction is already turning out accurate.

you know how I know? because the leaders of these womens rights said that they are going to.

regardless of your point