Supreme Court

Trump Will Announce His SCOTUS Pick Around Inauguration, Says Reince Priebus

"Certainly by the time we get to inauguration, either shortly before or shortly thereafter, we'll reveal the name of who our nominee will be."

|

Gage Skidmore / Flickr.com

In an interview this week with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt, Reince Priebus, the incoming White House chief of staff for president-elect Donald Trump, revealed a possible timetable for when Trump will announce his pick to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court.

"I think that's going to be something that we're going to start after the new year," Priebus told Hewitt. "And certainly by the time we get to inauguration, either shortly before or shortly thereafter, we'll reveal the name of who our nominee will be."

During his presidential campaign, Trump floated the names of 21 possible candidates that he said he would consider naming to the High Court. "This list is definitive and I will choose only from it in picking future Justices," Trump insisted back in September.

Let's assume Trump keeps his word and selects one of those names next month. What will that mean for the future of the Court?

The answer depends entirely on the name he picks. One of Trump's shortlisters is Justice Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court, a libertarian legal hero whose judicial record includes a spirited defense of economic liberty and a sharp indictment of asset forfeiture abuse. Another Trump shortlister is Judge Diane Sykes of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, the author of a key opinion affirming the First Amendment right to record the police.

That's the good news. The bad news is that another one of Trump's shortlisters is Judge William Pryor of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. Pryor is an advocate of judicial deference, the legal philosophy that says the courts should respect the decisions of the democratically accountable branches of government and therefore uphold most government actions. This view has led Pryor to praise the New Deal era Supreme Court for its decisions upholding state and federal regulatory power, including broad congressional power under the Commerce Clause. According to Pryor, "not every controversy requires a judicial resolution or trumping of the will of the majority."

Needless to say, there are some big differences in the judicial philosophies of these candidates. We'll find out soon where Trump and his advisers stand.

NEXT: Liberal Celebrity Videos Failed to Stop Donald Trump, But Trump's Victory Has Failed to Stop Liberal Celebrity Videos

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Trump Will Announce His SCOTUS Pick Around Inauguration, Says Guy With Star Wars Villian Name

    1. I AM YOUR FATHER. So stop making out with your sister.

      1. Awww dad!

        *stomps off to room and slams door*

  2. I saw something a day or two ago- it all runs together, so I have no cite.

    Somebody was advocating (apparently in complete seriousness) for Obama to just decree Merrick Garland to be the newest member of the Supreme Court, because a Trump appointee is just too horrific to countenance.

    That’s how things are done in America, I guess.

  3. Democrats are already ramping up efforts to oppose the nomination.

    1. Operation Irrelevance

    2. That ramp is mandatory under the ADA.

    1. Margaret Ryan.

    2. Ghost of Strom Thurmond

  4. Giuliani or Christie?

    I hate you.

  5. Jesus Christ, he really is going to run this whole fucking thing like a goddamn reality TV show. Next week, we reveal the finalists for Trump’s official White House Toilet Paper Supplier! You won’t believe #2! And all the media hacks rush out to hyperventilate and shit themselves over the possibilities for 72 straight fucking hours non-stop.

    1. It’s worked for him so far.

    2. Speaking of partisan hackery, somebody posted this the other day and I read on in astonishment all the way to the part where they randomly insert a picture of Putin. At that point, I lost count of the number of evidence-free assertions (every time they referred to the alleged hackers, they were called Russian Hackers). I’m starting to realize what they’re doing. Deception by repetition. If you repeat a lie enough times, people stop questioning it. And indeed, the comments section will make you lose faith in humanity for how easily duped the True Believers are and what they’re proposing to “fix” things.

      It’s like living in an alternate reality. Evidence is not required, simply believe the word of Top Men. When all this blows over and evidence is still not found, do you think anybody will be pointing out the volume of Fake News? pushed out by the NYT? It’s no more plausible than Pizzagate. There’s a great opportunity here for Reason to shove their noses in the mud for becoming one of the largest distributors of Fake News? this year. If only they had the balls.

      1. Soume CIA douche novel gave an interview, widely quoted by proggies, where he says that it’s outrageous for anyone to disbelieve the pronouncements of the CIA – like they’re literally the word or God, and anyone that does so is insulting the honor of brace CIA agents that put their life on the line for your freedom.

        All in defense of a claimed anonymous source in the bowels of Langley.

        The progs have completely gone down a rabbit hole.

        1. CIA douche novel is an epic band name.

          1. +1 Sausage Assassin

    3. Is anyone not entertained about this? It really can’t lead to anything but good things,by the time it’s all over nobody will take the media or the executive branch seriously except hyperventilating partisans and dyed in wool democrats and progressive will be arguing for federalism and calling for a constitutional convention in less than three months

    4. Jesus Christ, he really is going to run this whole fucking thing like a goddamn reality TV show.

      Does America want or deserve anything different at this point?

  6. For what little it is worth, Pryor is the clear leader in betting markets, with double the odds of the next closest (Sykes). Not that those markets capture Trump’s thought process, but that’s the way the media scuttlebutt is leaning.

  7. My guess: his choice might seriously piss off the electoral college.

  8. He’ll probably start off with someone like Rick Santorum, so that any pick made afterward seems relatively reasonable.

    1. Salty ham tears harvest 2017?

      1. if it’s Santorum, I doubt it’ll taste ‘hammy’.

        1. It’s a reference to this thread, often called the “salty ham tears” thread. The day Santorum lost an election and trotted his family out on stage to wail.

          1. I guess you don’t read Dan Savage.

            1. It was unclear that you were referencing the dictionary definition of ‘santorum’, which should probably not be capitalized given that it is not a proper noun.

  9. Wow, judging by the picture, Trump is really serious about his outreach to the black community.

  10. Best option would be a pick that provokes (non-lethal) seizures in Ginsberg and Kennedy, giving him a threefer.

  11. One of Trump’s shortlisters is Justice Don Willett

    YES!! Yes to Justice Willett, please Mr. President-elect!

  12. OMG! OBVIOUSLY he’s going to nominate Putin! Where is my safe spaaaaacccceeee……!!! I need my Play-doh and therapy puppy!!!

  13. I know someone with an anonymous source in 17 intellegence agencies that says the fix is in.

    Trump will put Putin on SCOTUS.

  14. It’s like living in an alternate reality. Evidence is not required, simply believe the word of Top Men

    Meanwhile, “Donald Trump’s post truth world” has become a widespread meme in liberal land. The lack of self-awareness in modern American discourse is breathtaking.

  15. Unlike Trump, Willett’s Twitter is awesome. Maybe Trump wouldn’t want the competition.

  16. Let’s assume Trump keeps his word and selects one of those names next month. What will that mean for the future of the Court?

    The answer depends entirely on the name he picks.

    Such insight.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.