MENU

Reason.com

Free Minds & Free Markets

Justice Anthony Kennedy Is Retiring and All Hell Is About to Break Loose

It’s the end of an era at the U.S. Supreme Court.

U.S. Supreme CourtU.S. Supreme CourtIt's the end of an era at the U.S. Supreme Court. Today Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement.

In a letter sent this afternoon to President Donald Trump, Kennedy announced that "effective July 31 of this year," he will "end his regular active status as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court." "Please permit me by this letter," Kennedy wrote, "to express my profound gratitude for having had the privilege to seek in each case how best to know, interpret, and defend the Constitution and the laws that must always conform to its mandates and promises."

Appointed to the Supreme Court in 1987 by President Ronald Reagan, Kennedy's impact on American law and politics is almost beyond reckoning. From the battles over gay rights, abortion, and affirmative action, to the clashes over gun control, campaign finance, and health care reform, Kennedy's fingerprints are everywhere. He is perhaps the single most influential jurist alive today and he will surely go down in American legal history as one of the most influential justices to serve on the high court.

Perhaps his most notable contribution came in the area of gay rights. Kennedy is and will remain a hero to many for his authorship of all four of the Supreme Court's great decisions affirming the fundamental rights of gay people. In Romer v. Evans (1996), Kennedy led the Court in overturning a Colorado constitutional amendment that barred state officials from taking any action designed to protect gays from discrimination. In Lawrence v. Texas (2003), Kennedy led the Court in overturning that state's ban on "homosexual conduct." In United States v. Windsor (2013), Kennedy led the Court in invalidating a central part of the Defense of Marriage Act. Finally, in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), he led the Court in recognizing a constitutional right to gay marriage.

On the hot button issue of abortion, Kennedy managed to alternately hearten and dispirit both sides of the debate. In Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), Kennedy joined the plurality opinion which is widely credited with saving Roe v. Wade from being overturned. Casey reaffirmed that abortion is a fundamental right and held that state regulations many not "impose an undue burden on the right." Yet in Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), Kennedy wrote the majority opinion upholding the 2003 Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act signed by President George W. Bush. More recently, Kennedy joined Justice Stephen Breyer's opinion in Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt (2016), which held that Texas exceeded its lawful regulatory power when it imposed certain onerous health and safety restrictions on abortion clinics and providers.

As a moderate conservative with liberal tendencies, Kennedy often found himself casting the tie-breaking vote in such closely divided cases. That gave him tremendous influence over the direction of American law.

That influence came with a certain price. Over the years, Kennedy has been denounced by every major faction in American politics. In conservative circles, for example, he has been keelhauled as a reckless judicial activist who "invented" a right to gay marriage. Liberals, meanwhile, have burned him in effigy as the unwitting mouthpiece for corporate oligarchs thanks to his majority opinion in the Citizens United case. And among libertarians, Kennedy has been damned as the fair-weather federalist who torpedoed the rights of local medical marijuana users in favor of a federal drug control scheme. Libertarians will also point out that Kennedy joined the majority opinion that unleashed the forces of eminent domain abuse in Kelo v. City of New London (2005).

To say the least, Kennedy's jurisprudence defies easy categorization. Legal scholars will be arguing about it for a long time to come.

Kennedy's retirement comes at a loaded moment in American politics. As things stand now, Senate Republicans have the votes—but just barely—to approve whatever nominee President Trump puts forward as a replacement. But what if the Republican ranks don't hold?

And then of course there are the Democrats, who will undoubtedly mount a massive political attack on whatever nominee Trump puts forward.

In short, thanks to Kennedy's retirement, all hell is about to break loose.

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.

  • 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed||

    Elections...wait for it... wait for it... wait for it...

    have consequences.

  • DrZ||

    "Erections...

    haveconsequences."

    With Roe vs. Wade, the consequences are not so great.

  • Marcus Aurelius||

    #metoo

  • Harvard||

    Predilections are inconsequential.

  • TeamsterX||

    Trump should nominate Robert Mueller and watch heads explode.

  • Duke of url||

    Or Wayne Lapierre

  • Duke of url||

    Ann Coulter

  • buybuydandavis||

    Winner!

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Justice Coulter has a nice ring to it. I'm sure her writings would be most entertaining. And the proggie tears would be delicious.

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Think about this; how is progressive rock so progressive if it's just nerdy white dudes?

    Ann Coulter is a poopy head.

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Jim Comey!

  • Rufus T. Firefly.||

    Ben Shapiro

  • CE||

    Ron Paul

  • Unicorn Abattoir||

    Unicorn Abattoir (God help us all)

  • TeamsterX||

    "Life Spans have consequences".

    Fixed it!

  • M.L.||

    It is morning in America once again.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Much like Jimmy Carter, Obama's shittiness set the stage for our current renewal.

    Our country truly is blessed.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Cant wait to find out how delicious Bill Maher's tears will be this Friday.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Why would anyone give that guy ratings by watching his hack show?

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    LC, HBO has no ratings system. As they are a paid subscription channel with no advertisers. So if one already has HBO, it makes no difference if one tunes into his show or not. Plus it's pretty likely that the major highlights of his whining will be excerpted and posted on YouTube.

  • TeamsterX||

    Maher is praying we have a Recession in the next 48 hours.

  • tlapp||

    That was an unbelievable comment but maybe it defines the left wing politics. Never let a crisis go to waste so what if people don't have jobs. Maher says let them eat cake.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Twitter is lit AF.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I bet. I dont use Twitter but PLEASE keep us informed.

    You post some great stuff that Reason will not touch and I am dying to collect more lefty tears from this two-week Kennedy new cycle.

    June has been great for serious setbacks for lefties. Travel ban victory, Kennedy retiring, Janus case victory, NK peace progress, booming economy, and much much more.

  • po||

    she cray.

  • Oli||

    Thank god you've got a president who would never go on incoherent rants on Twitter. Oh..

  • po||

    Sc justices >>>>>>>> rants

  • Deconstructed Potato||

    Her version of 'Walking in Memphis' is aight. I like it when she was(n't) singing it on the X Files.

  • Rhywun||

    I... I can't even. JFC she is insane.

  • Nardz||

    666 retweets upon my viewing

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    I like that had do research to learn that the Senate was an important element in the SCOTUS replacement process. That's gold, Jerry!

  • BestUsedCarSales||

  • H. Farnham||

    I comedian after my own heart... except funny.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    So cool I don't have to waste my time on Twitter. You guys do it for me!

  • BestUsedCarSales||

  • Citizen X||

    I would 100% support the nomination of Iowahawk to the Supreme Court.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Since he lost the ability to write long-form apparently, it would be enjoyable to have tweet length decisions.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I think Dave Mustaine might be a weird type of rogue Evangelical now.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I laughed and appreciated all the Twatter links. I have no idea who most of these people are though.

    It is funny to see the lefties really switching to advocating violence. They think going to war with some black clothes, a scarf, and a Che shirt will defeat tens of millions of armed Americans.

  • rocks||

    They are very close to pulling the trigger, the (justified) counter reaction will probably be a surprise to them.

  • TeamsterX||

    Trump should nominate Robert Mueller, and just laugh his ass off to the Star Spangled Banner playing as he watches Schumer, Pelosi and Waters just watch their heads explode on C-Span.

  • DaveSs||

  • loveconstitution1789||

    He's a "hard-ass desert anarchist"

  • Buddy Bizarre||

    That was a good 'un.

  • ||

    North Korea what? Theyre rapidly upgrading their nuke plants, put down the booze grandpa

  • perlchpr||

    I can only sort of imagine.

    I bet the frothing is mighty.

  • perlchpr||

    Just checked Facebook. Yeah, it's full of the cries of lefties.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Oh boy.

  • damikesc||

    Time to kill the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    There isn't one per se. A supermajority is not needed. A vote can be whisked to the Senate floor for straight vote after committee.

    Gorsuch was confirmed with 54 Senate votes.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Already done with Gorsuch.

  • Hunthjof||

    which was stupid for the Dems to fight him. he didn't change the balance of the court. But "MUH STOLEN SEAT" The GOP might have been less likely to end the filibuster to change the ideological balance. Now that it is done no biggie. the only issue I see are Twerps like McCain and Flake getting their panties in a twist and causing problems.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    McCain and Flake seem determined to do as much damage to America as possible before they are gone.

  • tlapp||

    Spite Trump and to hell with the nation is their MO. McCain the guy who never saw a country we shouldn't attack and Flake the phony libertarian.

  • Some Engineer||

    Can we get the Governor of Arizona to remove McCain based on inability to perform duties?

  • TeamsterX||

    We have been trying, but apparently McCain (actually his wife) has money invested in the Light Rail.

    Mass Transit, much more important to the Wishy-Washy than their legacies.

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    Yeah, it was a useless fight to pick. Schumer did his side no favors by indicating that the Dens planned to do the same in the event of a Hillary victory, either

  • Citizen X||

    Wait. Hell hadn't already broken loose? What has all of this nonsense been, then?

  • 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed||

    New Jersey.

  • Citizen X||

    Gross.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    The gates of hell will split open onto this plane when the notorious RBG crosses over.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    She's already a demilich. Let's not have any pretense that she intends to cross over before the heat death of the universe.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Only God can judge me, Red Tony.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Hey now! Ruth Nader Ginsberg is the ORIGINAL Gamgsta! Like depression era! You hear me cuz?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    ...Bader Bader Bader can't you see
    Sometimes your cases just hypnotize me
    And I just love your flashy dissents
    Guess that's why they broke, and you're so paid (uh)

  • TeamsterX||

    Right now we are in Fallout Boy...hell

    Next stage is nickelback...

    Then they start listening to William Shattner Spoken Word Albums...circa 1969

    that is when they will get violent (can't blame them for the Shattner)., thems some serious fighting, spoken words.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Thomas might be waiting to retire for Kennedy to have his replacement confirmed by the Senate.

    5 relatively young conservative justice vs 1 walking corpse (RBG), 1 old guy, and 2 relatively young lefties.

  • JFree||

    Too bad there ain't any libertarian judges

  • loveconstitution1789||

    What you call Libertarian is not someone we want on the court.

    Originalist is good at that would cover no drug laws, free market, and limited government.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Originalist, if honestly applied, would mean the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government.

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    What's the 14th amendment, chopped liver? You're and idiot.

    All the Congressional, media, and public debates recognized that the 14th amendment would apply the entire Constitution, Bill of Rights included, to the states. The the Supreme Court crapped on it with Slaughterhouse.

  • EscherEnigma||

    What's the 14th amendment
    A sword in the gut of "originalism".

    If you apply "original intent", you obviously don't consider the 14th Amendment as it wouldn't be ratified for nearly a century.

    If you do apply the 14th Amendment, then do you apply "1868 intent" (which obviously isn't "originalism"), or invent a "what original intent would have been if the 14th Amendment had been part of it all along" (which again, obviously isn't "originalism")?

    "Originalism" is a rhetorical sham.

  • Sevo||

    ""Originalism" is a rhetorical sham."

    When you make up your own dictionary, anything you don't like is a sham.
    Do you think your bullshit hasn't been noticed?

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    Of course you apply original as when it was created. That's what "original" means. What next, you will complain about the Magna Carta or that "press" or "speech" should inly include 1787 press and speech?

    You aren't exactly original in your complaint.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Of course you apply original as when it was created.


    Which brings you right back to not applying the BoR to states.

    BoR applying to states is incompatible with "originalism".

  • a tandem||

    If you apply "original intent", you obviously don't consider the 14th Amendment

    That is nonsense. originalism includes the constitution being validly and fundamentally changed on 2/3 vote of the states.
    The canard that "originalism is a sham" is absurd. The founders did not see themselves as prescient gods. Nor did the US citizenry at the time.

  • Seamus||

    Sure, if by "all," you mean "some." John Bingham and Jacob Howard may have believed that the 14th amendment would incorporate the bill of rights, but they didn't speak for everybody who voted for the amendment. Charles Fairman did a pretty thorough dive into the legislative history of the 14th amendment and concluded that Justice Black's theory of incorporation was blowing smoke. (C. Fairman, Does the Fourteenth Amendment Incorporate the Bill of Rights?, 2 Stat. L. Rev. 5 (1949).)

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    All the debaters talked of "all" privileges and immunities, not just the few related to waterways or whatever. You are not the first to claim otherwise, but reading the debates would disabuse of that falsehood, if you dared.

  • BSL1||

    The doctrine of incorporation is a legal scam. The BOR were not modified by the 14th. Congress shall make no law means, pretty much, what it says. Nothing in the 14th says otherwise. At least not in the real world, where words have meaning.

  • TeamsterX||

    Thing is, the Originalist will tale into account how the Amendment is written and previous judgements,,,

    Not the feels....just go read the dissent from Sotamayor...she has the feelz.

  • Juice||

    Originalist, if honestly applied, would mean the Bill of Rights only applied to the federal government.

    Why? Please explain.

    Why was the wording of the 1st amendment specifically applied to the federal government and not the states while the other amendments are more general and universal? The supremacy clause specifically states that all judges in the states should follow the supreme law of the land, ie the constitution, including the Bill of Rights. The original intent of the Bill of Rights was to be the supreme law of the land.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Why? Please explain.


    Because the drafters weren't concerned about what Virginia was doing to Virginian citizens, they were concerned that Virginians (through congress) might try to do stuff to New York citizens.

  • TeamsterX||

    originalist look at the Bill of Rights and the Amendents as added by 2/3rd of the states and previous decisions.

    Judges such as the 9th Circuit, Sotamayor RBG and a former President who claims to be a Constitutional lawyer...look at the Constitution as a breathing entity that should be interpreted according to the times....

    all based on their feelings....no right or wrong concerning the law...just how you felt when you violated it....

    Let's face it, we all feel pretty good breaking the law ;)

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

  • TeamsterX||

    All you have to do is bring out Anita Hill for a 5 minute #metoo interview...clarence will react like a man with a viagara overdose and serve another five years.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    5 relatively young conservative justice vs 1 walking corpse (RBG), 1 old guy, and 2 relatively young lefties.

    You are overlooking the Democrats who will join the Court when it is enlarged.

  • a tandem||

    You are overlooking the Democrats who will join the Court when it is enlarged.
    reply to this report spam

    Your tears and insane ravings ae delicious

  • Just Say'n||

    Honestly Republicans should appoint an AR-15 to the bench to truly own the libs

  • John||

    With a bump stock and extended magazine.

  • Citizen X||

    And the shoulder thing that goes up.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    And one of those bayonets. that way we really pwn the SJW, intersectional-Feminist types.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    And an American flag design on the stock.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Also "You Can Still Rock In America" by Night Ranger, because that song is the most perfect track.

  • Caphon||

    And the chainsaw attachment, don't forget that beauty. Extra mags, because when all the rounds are fired the mag doesn't work anymore, right?

  • TeamsterX||

    Just a picture of Nickelback and Fallout Boy having a slap fight would set these tools off.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Amd a suppressor.

  • TeamsterX||

    woah a suppressor would make him illegal.

  • sparkstable||

    Just call it an undocumented suppressor and you're good again.

  • Longtobefree||

    Actually sound suppressors are legal. They just require the same permit as full auto.
    You know, rights only for the obscenely rich, not ALL Americans.
    (For all you liberals out there, NFA is the National Firearms Act)
    There are generally three ways to own a NFA weapon: as an individual, through a gun trust, or as a Limited Liability Company. (This is how lawyers get rich; trusts and LLCs to exercise constitutional rights)
    All NFA items must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Private owners wishing to purchase an NFA item must obtain approval from the ATF, pass an extensive background check to include submitting a photograph and fingerprints, fully register the firearm, receive ATF written permission before moving the firearm across state lines, and pay a tax. (You pay for the background check and the fingerprinting, and of course the tax)

  • Longtobefree||

    A permanent transfer, even if tax-free, must be approved by ATF. The proper form should be submitted to ATF before the transfer occurs. For example, lawful heirs must submit a Form 5 and wait for approval before taking possession of any NFA item willed to them. (The tax is $200.00).
    Upon the request of any ATF agent or investigator, or the Attorney General, the registered owner must provide proof of registration of the firearm. (Note there is no requirement that the "request" have any reason at all, just any old "request" will do)
    Now picture the left wing outcry if anyone tried to apply that kind of restriction to the First Amendment.

  • Longtobefree||

    Just for the record, the amendment ends as follows: "shall not be infringed"

  • Salmonsnail||

    No, they should nominate the mutilated body of a elementary age immigrant.

  • po||

    Enough about your sex life already.

  • Just Say'n||

    Did you cry a little bit while you wrote this?

  • TeamsterX||

    he just hugged his corpse lover.

  • a tandem||

    Mutilated murdered bodies of children occur about 6:1 in Democrat counties and cities. They are much more likely to occur by beating, strangulation, guns, bludgeon or knife in in Maryland they are in same region very close education, income, age average demographic Virginia.

    Virginia has about 25% more gun owning households, close to 40 times the number of non law enforcement gun carriers, and is awash in AR-15 yet it has way less murdr of children than Maryland

    The risk to children is being domiciled in a home with a prior criminal or a woman dating a prior criminal -- something that occurs at double the rate in Democrat jurisdictions, because they sentence violent criminals more leniently

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""Honestly Republicans should appoint an AR-15 to the bench to truly own the libs""

    That's funny.

  • Muzzled Woodchipper||

    With a Chainsaw Boyonet.

  • The original jack burton||

    I'll support that only with a chainsaw attachment

  • Fuck you, Shikha (Nunya)||

    I'm looking for a girl with green eyes. Seen any lately?

  • TeamsterX||

    Robert Mueller, watch the Russian Collusion disappear, then nominate the new Bribery Special Counsel to replace Ruth Ginsburg...

    I would die happy just knowing how miserable a bunch of emo's are.

  • John||

    I don't see why the Republican votes would not hold. The Democrats can filibuster but to what end? They are not going to be able to hold out for two years. And the Republicans will eventually go nuclear on them. The longer they filibuster the easier it will be for the Republicans to go nuclear.

  • Citizen X||

    Like common sense is gonna stop them.

  • John||

    I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part. And the Senate Democrats are just the people to do it.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Luckily, a Futile and Stupid Gesture just came out this year.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Are you talking about when you put your foreskin up for sale on ebay?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I wish I knew where it was enough to have sold it. My foreskin is still out there, biding it's time.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    I think it's currently circumnavigating Antarctica as a jib on Thor Heyerdahl's old boat.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Luckily, a Futile and Stupid Gesture just came out this year.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

  • Gilbert Martin||

    Futile and stupid gestures are Democrat's stock in trade.

    Like San Francisco suing Exxon-Mobil for alleged future rises in sea level due to global warming.

  • Salmonsnail||

    They got a judge and the defendants to agree that fossil fuels cause climate change which is a huge concession from the head in the sand crowd. The evidentiary template will probably be used in future cases.

  • po||

    which the newly stocked SCOTUS will dispose of lololol

  • Salmonsnail||

    Aint stocked yet asshole.

  • po||

    lolololol

  • Scarecrow Repair & Chippering||

    The oil companies agreed "for the sake of argument". If you can show that the plaintiffs have no case, even if all their statements of fact were true, then you can get a summary judgment. Or something like that. IANAL.

  • TeamsterX||

    I can get the Ninth circuit to agree that a 9 yr old feels he is a zoo animal and should live in San Diego Zoo.

    Face it, emo judges are falling to wayside and curled up waiting for the next Fallout Boy Album.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    If we get a real Speaker with some actual balls, then maybe congress could start impeaching some of these wackos.

  • DarrenM||

    Fossil fuels have been around for millions of years and they are only now causing climate change?

  • Robert Crim||

    Well, I don't recall any dinosaurs who drove cars, but I wasn't around then, so maybe one or two of them had an Edsel.

  • miketol||

    Just ask Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She was a young woman during the Jurassic period. She should know what kind of a car T. Rex drove.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    I believe Marc Bolan drove a Morgan Aero.

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    I believe Marc Bolan drove a Morgan Aero.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    I hear some f them really like off-roading in their Raptors.

  • Salmonsnail||

    It'll depend on who Trump picks. It's then any whiff of gay or abortion backsiding I suspect the RINO will defect.

  • John||

    So they will have to engage and sodomy and have an abortion to get through confirmation?

  • Salmonsnail||

    Do you think Gorsuch would overturn Row or Lawrence?

  • po||

    "Row"

    lolololo

  • Salmonsnail||

    Typo retard. The "e" is next to the "w" on the phone keyboard.

  • po||

    lolololol

  • John||

    Neither. But Ogberfell might go down or be so limited to its facts that it becomes meaningless.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Sure. Both rest on the same "right to privacy" that y'all are so skeptical of. Knock that out and both (along with Loving v. Viriginia and Griswold v. Connecticut) would quickly be challenged.

    Oh, he might go the Thomas route and say something like "it is stupid for the state to do so, but it is their right to be stupid", but I fully believe he'd take out the "right to privacy" and damn the consequences.

  • Jerryskids||

    Well, Ronald Reagan picked this one. Which just goes to show St. Ronnie isn't infallible like Our Lord and Savior Donald J. Trump.

  • Gaear Grimsrud||

    We are truly blessed.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    The Democrats dont have the balls to delay this new appointment. If Democrats are smart, they will seek good will on a moderate for when RBG dies while Trump is prez. If not, Trump will really goose them by nominating a Constitutionalist to replace her.

    Gorsuch was the 'stolen seat' from what's his name that they wanted Obama to get appointed to the SCOTUS and he had 2 Democrats vote for his confirmation.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Three, and it's very likely the the missing Johnny Isakson would have been four had he been present at the time.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    I gave my Senator, Johnny Isakson, a piece of my mind for missing the vote because of surgery. Fucker has one job and knew about the confirmation vote ahead of time.

    If you are having health problems in Congress, fucking retire. McCain is another asshole who was a walking medical problem and refused to retire.

  • Libertymike||

    Garland, LC, Garland.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Haha. My bad. He is so forgettable. Haha.

  • M.L.||

    Correction. Dems don't have the *seats* to delay this new appointment.

    *NUKE BLAST RIPS THROUGH SENATE DEMS*

  • Paloma||

    I bet Trump will nominate a Constitutionist anyway.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    "Gorsuch was the 'stolen seat' from what's his name "'

    Wasn't what's his name a more conservative leaning judge? It would be funny if Trump nominated him.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I have thought so, too. If RBG kicks the bucket, Trump should nominate Garland and watch the progressives teist themselves into balls trying to figure out how to object to him.

  • Derp-o-Matic 6000||

    They don't even bother trying to reconcile their contradictory statements anymore. Whatever is convenient in this very moment is truth. Remember "The 1980s called and they want their foreign policy back"?

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Hypocrisy is a cornerstone of progressivism. Situational ethics are another.

  • Brett Bellmore||

    There's an excellent chance the Republican votes won't hold, because they're depending on several Republican Senators who are retiring/dying, and thus have no need to care what other Republicans think.

    McCain in particular would gladly vote "No", just to stick it to the people he so hated having to pretend being one of.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    His refusal to retire highlights him as a man with little decency. And a shame to both my state, and the great man he succeeded in the Senate.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Yeah. Goldwater wasn't always perfect. But he was a true blue Arizona son that I'm proud of. McCain, not so much.

  • JesseAz||

    Dilly Dilly.

  • TeamsterX||

    As an Arizonian, I cannot stand McCain and have disliked him since the Keating 5.

    I think Jeff Flake is retiring, because he will miss McCain's sweet spooning as dusk falls in D.C.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Goldwater wasn't perfect. But the man was honest and had principles. Imagine if congress were loaded with people like that.

    I'll take imperfection without hesitation if we could have that.

  • Chipper Morning Baculum||

    Well, we will see how willing you are going to be to retire and give up your leadership of the LP, Sarwark.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    If McCain fucked up another good justice appointment, Arizonians would probably ship him back to Vietnam to let those Commies finish what they started 50 years ago.

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    No, unfortunately. He's Arizona royalty basically. Even when people can't seem to give a reason why they respect him, he's still deeply respected here.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Arizona is a weird state. Pro-gun but all the lefties that moved there really messed up its conservative street cred.

    All that desert heat melts brains, I guess.

  • Hooha||

    California expats are poisoning every state within arms' reach.
    "Hurr durr, I can't afford to live here. I'll move somewhere more reasonable, then vote to elect the same brand of looters to make it more like Cali!"

    It's really an incredible method of spreading a destructive ideology. Reminds me of explosive fungal spores, or a virus compromising a cell.

  • vek||

    As a native Californian I do have to point out that there ARE two types of people bailing out of California...

    Those leaving to get away from all the stupid

    And those leaving to recreate all the stupid.

    My family was the first kind, unfortunately too many of the 2nd kind followed us to Washington and ruined it... So on to Idaho I guess! If Idaho falls to the proggies the whole country is done, so that's about as good as it gets.

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    I had friends in Coeur d'Alene back during the wildfires and riots and mudslides around the time of Rodney King, and they told me how a bunch of Californians moved there in the early spring, and by the time the second winter was done, they were all gone.

    Of course, maybe them moving to a cold climate might get them on board with promoting global warming...

  • vek||

    I'm sure. The snow thing is a bit of a turn off to me too, but that area is not nearly as bad as saaay Michigan. It's the local weather patterns that actually keep it somewhat mild for how far north it is.

    Either way I'll take some snow compared to putting up with the communists in Seattle nowadays. Spokane/CDA area is probably the most likely place for me right this second, but Boise is 2nd. I'm going to take a trip to Boise and see how it seems IRL, which I just did for Spokane and CDA and was fairly okay with.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    They must have moved over the border to Spokane. We can't get rid of them.

  • Libertymike||

    What does that say about Flagstaff, Glendale, Mesa, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Sedona, Tempe, and Tuscon et al?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    It's still filled with good people, and beautiful landscape. But they have a tendency to vote for a certain type of authority figure.

    Same with Arpaio shamefully coming from Maricopa. Or fucking Raul Grijalva coming from Tucson (My district in fact, my vote did nothing to stem his mustache).

  • Libertymike||

    McCain is such a nasty, profligate progressive.

    He is pure evil.

  • Libertymike||

    BUCS, what about Clint Bolick?

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    I like the IJ and Goldwater often times, but don't know him specifically well enough to say. But those are some credentials that indicate he's probably closer to my opinions than most.

  • Paloma||

    They may be counting on filibustering long enough to turn the Senate to Democrat majority.

  • loveconstitution1789||

    1) There will be no Democrat majority in election 2018.
    2) No supermajority is needed to confirm appointments, so unless a single Senator is going to talk for 7 months straight its not going to work. 5 months to election 2018 plus 2 months until Senators are sat in Congress.

  • Jerryskids||

    LOL - I think you're discounting how many Republicans would defect if their finger in the air tells them the political winds are changing direction. As long as Trump keeps winning, they'll be glad to cheer for him. Somebody else starts winning and they'll cheer for that guy, too.

  • a tandem||

    @jerriys
    It is much more likely that a few Democrat senators will defect

  • John||

    Which is very unlikely to happen this fall. If they do that and the Republicans keep the Senate, which is pretty likely, they then will get someone worse after the election.

  • TrickyVic (old school)||

    ""The Democrats can filibuster but to what end?"'

    Now we will see if they were really serious when they were saying SCOTUS nominees should get a vote.

    What say Chucky Schumer?

  • EscherEnigma||

    Similarly, we'll see if Republicans were serious about waiting for an election.

    I expect all were full of shit.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I think there is a difference between purely legislative and presidential/legislative election years, however, I'll also admit not everyone will see it that way.

  • JesseAz||

    Hey idiot... Those are presidential election, not midyears. By your idiotic translation we can only appoint justices in odd years. Why are liberals so fucking dumb? Obama appointed a justice in 2010 prior to the election moron.

  • EscherEnigma||

    Dude, I'm questioning the sincerity of congressional Republicans, not signing onto their stated beliefs.

    If you're going to criticize me, you should at least criticize me for something I've actually said/done.

  • NotAnotherSkippy||

    You should be happy that they're following the Biden Rule.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    I will be happy when Democrats enlarge the court to a point at which the wingnut wing of the Court becomes irrelevant.

    I would probably agree to limit the number of new positions to that needed to give the Democrats a single-vote advantage if Gorsuch and Alito would resign (with the understanding they'd be replaced by Republicans)..

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    Check out Arthur L. Hicklib's rich fantasy life here.

  • I am the 0.000000013%||

    It's a good idea - every time a new president comes in, they should just expand the court by as many adherents of their philosophy they can get packed into the court.

    Heck, after 20 years or so, 80% of the populace will be part of the Supremes.

    Of course, that leaves us poor libertarians out, always to be judged, never to judge.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Rev, you keep saying that like it's trolling us. It isn't. No one here believes it is a realistic outcme. You also make yourself look more ridiculous than you already did by saying, and saying it over and over.

    You're just a punchline to a bad joke. I'll bet you also take the garbage spewed on Bill Maher's show seriously too.

  • Robert Crim||

    What's that? Stick your foot in your mouth?

    Lanky Noodle went to Boston, riding on a pony,
    Stuck it's footsie in his mouth and ordered, "More baloney!"

  • Praveen R.||

    And you are no less moronic. Why even wait in a presidential year? Didnt voters give Obama the mandate for four more years? Not just 3 years. Why do the voters in 2012 have less influence of a 2015 appointment compared to voters in 2016

  • Echo Chamber||

    Chuck has said that the pick should wait until after the midterms, cuz that's what republicans did and they'd be hypocrites to do otherwise now.

    The nuance between midterm and presidential elections was lost on Chuckster

  • Entropy Drehmaschine Void||

    The only thing not lost on the Chuckster is a camera location.

  • Paulpemb||

    The Republicans have already invoked the nuclear option during Gorsuch's confirmation. Supreme Court Justices now require only a majority vote to be confirmed. Of course, Senators McCain and Flake might vote with the Democrats just to piss off Trump, but then that makes the Supreme Court an issue in the November midterms and the Senate map this year doesn't look good for Democrats.

    I can't imagine Joe Manchin, for example, telling his constituents "Vote for me so I can stop Trump!"

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Well it wil certainly cause Maxine Watere to make some calm, measured, and pithy speeches.

  • Robert Crim||

    More likely, she'll demand we all boycott Republican Senators by refusing to sit with them during the vote.

    Oh, wait a minute: That would make the vote unanimous!

    But, she's dumb enough to try that.

  • TeamsterX||

    Flake, McCain, Corker would block everything just to be dbags.

  • Cantard||

    There is no filibuster on the SCOTUS appointment. It's a simple majority vote.

    The only reason the GOP would defect is if Trump appointed someone complete retarded, like someone from Fox News or from the more deranged corners of web.

    The only way we don't get a hard line conservative SCOTUS for the next generation is if the Democrats net two seats in the Senate in November...which is a long shot.

    The GOP already went nuclear. That's why we have Gorsuch.

  • Longtobefree||

    Because they will have to expel AZ from the senate. McCain cannot vote, and Flake would vote against Mother Teresa if she was nominated by Trump.

  • Salmonsnail||

    It's Sen. McCain time!!! Hahahahahaha!

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    1) Senators can't vote absentee or by proxy.

    2) Even in the unlikely event that the on-his-deathbed Arizona putz decided to show up to work for the first time in several months and convince flakey Jeff Flake to vote "No" along with him an a pathetic dying attempt to stick it to Trump, it probably wouldn't matter because the vulnerable Heidi Heitkamp, Joe Manchin and Joe Donnelly will almost certainly vote for Trump's nominee once again.

  • Salmonsnail||

    Bro, those RINOs support abortion and gay rights and I doubt they are going let a judge through who would overturn Kennedy's legacy.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    I guess a lot of people still somehow haven't figured out that Trump is much more libertarian-leaning than he is an old school hard conservative ideologue.

    He's not going to pick someone who wants to throw dudes in jail for having gay butt sex. That's just not the kind of guy he is.

  • Eidde||

    The Secretary of Agriculture probably doesn't want to, either, but if someone came to him asking for a *ukase* declaring sodomy a constitutional right, the Secretary would probably say it's not within his powers.

    Why is such a *ukase* any more within the power of federal judges than the Secretary of Agriculture?

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Indeed. He's been around enough show business folks that I doubt Trump is homophobic. Even if He were, I know plenty of old guys who dislike homosexuality that say "the hell with it, if some faggots want to fuck each other in private, why should I give a shit?"

  • jomo||

    Lolwut?

    Regardless of whether he is personally cool with it, the Breitbart commentariat is not. I'd say 90% chance he intentionally nominated someone based purely on likelihood that that person is likely to "piss off liberals." That is the main thing now, the go-to play.

    Step 1: do something purely to help his super elite bros and make sure it is designed to also "piss off the liberals"
    Step 2: claim that if you don't like it you're a "Soto's globalist cuck"
    Step 3: play the victim and demand that there be a return to "civility"
    Step 4: personally attack someone on Twitter
    Step 5: repeat crocodile tears and call for "civility"
    Step 6: golf

  • JesseAz||

    Problem is he doesn't have to do anything to pissoff liberals. See travel ban. Used a standard power of the president per law and outrage. Liberals even bad mouthed him signing the right to try bill. Liberals are fucking insane.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Everyone lost their mind that a handful of Muslim majority countries would have travel suspended for a whole 90 day's while security concerns are sorted out.

    Worse than Hitler!

  • EscherEnigma||

    And the part that you haven't figured out is that while Trump may not be personally homophobic/whatever, he has no problem appointing people that are.

    Or to put it another way... Trump may not be interesting in throwing gay people in jail, but throwing gay people in jail is probably acceptable collateral damage.

  • TeamsterX||

    Trump is an Old School JFK Liberal, which makes him closer to Libertarian than the Current Conservatives.

  • po||

    You mean, "another" lololol

  • Salmonsnail||

    Overturning Lawrence or Roe would be a gift to liberals. Careful what you wish for you scumbag bigoted piece of shit.

  • po||

    deep breaths!!!

  • TeamsterX||

    bigot!

    I took a drink!

    Please drop Nazi or Racist...I want to take tomorrow off.

  • Migrant Log Chipper||

    When did the new troll show up....been off line for a few days?

  • perlchpr||

    When did the new troll show up....been off line for a few days?

    Today, as far as I can tell.

  • soldiermedic76||

    I would like to see how Tester votes, as well. He voted against Gorsuch but now it is an election year, and us Montanans are keeping an eye on him.

  • soldiermedic76||

    Can't count on Missoula and Bozeman to save him every time.

  • SamHell||

    There's always Butte...

  • Migrant Log Chipper||

    Interesting point, I think he stays with the herd if team red has the votes, if they don't it could be interesting. Now that Fellows croaked the L party has lost steam and won't get 5 plus% like Tester's last go round, which I think gave him the W. Plus Rosendale sure seems like a d bag. After Mr Ts performance with Anderson Cooper trashing Jackson on CNN I hope the asshole goes down, too bad it would be Rosendale if he does. I think Gianforte beats "Moar free shit" Williams pretty easily, though, free shit doesn't play well here.

  • a tandem||

    It's Sen. McCain time!!! Hahahahahaha!

    You know Pew Research shows that leftist like yourself are much more likely to be profoundly ignorant of civics and current events, and you show this continually.

    McCain is not going to travel to DC to vote, and he would have to. It is virtually a slam dunk that three to five Democrats will vote for any Trump choice.

    If you read up on heavily Dem sites, including sites with DNC insiders, this is all bad, a lose-lose. They will lose on blocking any nomination , the actually will lose votes on making a big deal of this. Even Twitter lighting up is bad for the DNC since they are losing control of snapping the debate.

    It is literally the worst possible timing for Democrats. O fall possible 48 months for Kennedy announcing to retire, June-July 2018 ranks as the worst timing for Democrats to respond to either stop a Trump nomination or even us it to advantage in midterms.

    Kennedy stuck the left and DNC in the eye and twisted it: he is not just retiring, he has picked the moment with the worst possible outcomes for the Democrats.
  • Iheartskeet||

    This is of course awesome in its awesome awesomeness.

    In keeping with populist sentiment, and elevating TV stars to public office, I suggest Napolitano as a replacement. I mean, the left is going to go crazy no matter what so f*** it.

  • Libertymike||

    The Judge would be a great nomination. I'll second it.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Is it acceptable for court decisions to be written as a series of rhetorical questions? If so, what form do we think this would take? Or would the Judge use the traditional format? And could his use of such questions become a sore point at any confirmation hearings? Should we be concerned?

  • Nardz||

    Who knows?

  • TeamsterX||

    Judge Judy! She would be awesome....just watching her slap down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as bad roommates would be epic!

  • Gilbert Martin||

    Make it Janice Rogers Brown and the left will really go crazy.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    She is my favorite judge as well, but sadly she's kind of old now.

    Willett is about to turn just 52 and could serve for a generation.

  • Paloma||

    Judge Judy?

  • TeamsterX||

    Karl Marx is not far left enough these days...they want some Stalin.

  • Citizen X||

    Brown isn't even 70 yet. By Supreme Court standards, she's practically an infant.

  • Bob Meyer||

    Janice Rogers Brown would be a great judge even if she only could serve for 10 years. 10 years of her would be worth 100 years of a "moderate" judge.

    Watching the progressives claim that she's not really black and not really a woman would be the most entertaining confirmation hearings ever!

  • Shockerengr||

    What if supreme Court rulings were nothing but questions?

  • loveconstitution1789||

    What?

  • Rat on a train||

    The answer would always be no?

  • Citizen X||

    Is the left going to go crazy? What could senate Democrats do to stop Napolitano? If appointed, would he serve?

  • Iheartskeet||

    I am pretty sure if Trump resurrected and nominated Che Guevara, it wouldn't be good enough for the left. Because Trump.

  • a tandem||

    Substitute Obama and his daughter and it's "racist"

  • TeamsterX||

    Nominate Maxine Watters, then nominate a Originalist the next week after she has her heart attack.

  • Rat on a train||

    He would ask more questions than Thomas.

  • perlchpr||

    Dude, I love it. :D

  • Libertymike||

    Here's hoping Clint Bolick gets the nomination.

    If POTUS does that, then we could truly say, "we are winning with the Supreme Court!"

  • Eidde||

    A long and happy retirement to Justice Kennedy.

    Bye now!

  • loveconstitution1789||

    Don't let the door hit you on the way out is more like it.

  • GILMORE™||

    (nelson laugh)

  • Eidde||

  • Salmonsnail||

    I distantly remember this type of shit grinning from the left when Scalia died and you saw how that turned out. You just never know.

  • lap83||

    true, but in their case it was probably karma

  • Salmonsnail||

    William Money could show up just as you were finishing that house.

  • Jerryskids||

    It's Munny, goddammit, and we all have it coming, kid.

  • po||

    take solace however you can!

    lolololol

  • Salmonsnail||

    Give that pendulum a good push.

  • po||

    cold comfort is still comfort!

  • Salmonsnail||

    I like Gorsuch but if he throws pregnant women and gay people to the wolves I probably will stop liking him so much.

  • po||

    lololololol

  • John||

    No you don't. The golden rule of Supreme Court justices is that at best they stay as conservative or right leaning as they claim to be. They either stay the same or move left once on the court. They never move right. So, there is no guarantee that whoever replaces Kennedy will be better and there is at least a 50 50 chance they will be worse.

  • Ken Shultz||

    It seems to me that a conservative supreme court justice is anybody who thinks they should call it straight.

    Isn't that the real difference between liberals and conservatives on the Supreme Court?

  • Salmonsnail||

    No, the differences are nuanced, varied and don't lend themselves to such simple delineations.

  • TeamsterX||

    The difference is whether they view the Constitution as it was written and has been previously ruled upon...or they play Fallout Boy, love incense and get sad when the feelz come on.

  • H. Farnham||

    My short list of desired appointees: Maryann Trump Barry, Roy Moore, or Merrick Garland.

    Of course, I'm basing this purely off of the entertainment that would likely ensue.

  • po||

    Nominate Joe Arpaio!

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Nominate Michael Hihn. just think of his written decisions.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Is there anything that says Trump can't nominate himself?

  • H. Farnham||

    He does have a very good brain.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Well, if you're gonna go controversial, why go half-ass?

    Isnt't that the most controversial nomination possible? If the Senate refuses to confirm him, then he can nominate Michael Flynn.

  • H. Farnham||

    True, but to really set things off, he should offer a quick path to citizenship to Vicente Fox to be appointed to SCOTUS. Then at the last minute, nominate Arpaio, as po suggested.

  • Rat on a train||

    SCOTUS doesn't have citizenship requirement.

  • po||

    the most controversial might be putin.

  • Salmonsnail||

    The Korean dictator, of course, since he's so loved by his people, surely we would love so.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Oh, I just thought of something that might be more controversial.

    Trump could nominate a statue of Robert E. Lee.

  • H. Farnham||

    Eh, I don't think anybody would be too offended by a statue of a '69 Dodge Charger... as long as it didn't have the KKK flag on the front like in the show.

  • po||

    the...front?

    oh boy...

  • H. Farnham||

    Ya know... the part that sits on top of the global warming parts that makes the car move.

  • po||

    No bro. Just no.

    It's on the roof. The roof.

  • H. Farnham||

    Touche... If my mom's side of the family catches wind of this (Macon, GA), I might be disowned.

  • Gilbert Martin||

    Dig up the corpse of James Madison and make it the Chief Justice.

  • Rat on a train||

    There is nothing saying he can't nominate Putin. Article III courts do not have prerequisites.

  • TeamsterX||

    Thank you, all I care about at this point is the entertainment...

    Robert Mueller
    CEO of Chik-Fil-A
    Guy fired from Google

  • Echo Chamber||

    Could Mueller get anything done before the court adjourns each year? What takes this guy so long to come to a conclusion?

  • Rat on a train||

    He has a well paying job for the duration. No need to rush it.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Milo Yannapoulos.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    NR: Anthony Kennedy Can't Be Allowed to Die
    So I've started to worry that if the Court soon consolidates to the left or the right, partisans on the losing end of that bargain will swiftly lose faith in democracy itself. A non-swinging Supreme Court would give the impression of super-charging the ability of one party to act, and restraining its competitor. A consolidated Supreme Court could open up whole new fields of legislation for one side to act against the other. At that point, what would happen?

  • Eidde||

    Wow, what a RINO sellout who can't even spell Tolkien properly.

  • Red Rocks White Privilege||

    So I've started to worry that if the Court soon consolidates to the left or the right, partisans on the losing end of that bargain will swiftly lose faith in democracy itself

    What the fuck kind of planet has this guy been living on the last 30 years? The political leanings of Supreme Court justice nominees were never much an issue until the Bork hearings, but Kennedy's acting out during that period ensured that the whole process would be a thoroughly disingenuous and partisan going forward.

  • Citizen X||

    To be fair, Kennedy was blackout drunk for almost his entire senate career.

  • Bob Meyer||

    It's always been wildly partisan. Joe Biden attacked Robert Bork for not believing in natural law (presumably Biden's Catholic sensibilities were offended) and then attacked Clarence Thomas for believing in natural law. Biden is one of the worst partisan hacks to ever breathe the Senate air and that is no mean accomplishment.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Bide. Is also incredibly stupid.

  • Sevo||

    I live in SF. Amazingly, the torch-light riots decrying Trump's ability to appoint a second SCJ have not yet begun.
    It might well be that the shock is so great that the riots will have to await the recovery of much of the population.

  • Ken Shultz||

    They're got so much to work through today. Their outrage meter was stuck on 11 over Melania not caring about separating babies from their mothers already. Then the SC upheld the "Muslim ban". Then the SC pulled the rug out from under the public employee unions.

    There was already nowhere to go on the outrage meter over 11. Where are they gonna go now that Trump gets to pick the next SC justice?

    I'm guessing they go straight to DefCon 6, which is, of course, full out Emergency Drum Circle!

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Maybe a riot? Maybe someone goes rogue and murders someone.

  • Ron||

    since they've already shot one representative and have been rioting for a while who will notice the difference. People will only listen to the boy who cried wolf for so long

  • BestUsedCarSales||

    Maybe a riot? Maybe someone goes rogue and murders someone.

  • Sevo||

    "Emergency Drum Circle!"
    I'm stealing that.
    But if RBG's chair gets empty, you have some work to do...

  • perlchpr||

    Is there a word for even more over-the-top hyperventilating? Turboventilating? 'Cause that's what's going to happen if RBG kicks it during Trump's term.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Remember when Trump was elected and progressives started just spontaneously protesting . . . they don't know what?

    We'll see more of that.

    Spontaneous drum circles, and no one knows why. That's what we'll see.

  • GILMORE™||

    ""Tarini Parti
    Verified account
    @tparti
    Koch network says its prepared to spend seven-figures to support a nominee "in the mold of Gorsuch."

    I'm somehow still pretty sure Reason (despite Kochbux) will find some way to see this as a potentially-bad-thing

  • Ron||

    Justice Kennedy, smart enough to retire before he gets the Scalia treatment.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    +1 pillow on top of the head.

  • esteve7||

    OMG This is amazing. I didn't vote for Trump but I'm now beginning to wish I had. Could you imagine the court with 2 leftists replacing Kennedy and Scalia? Kiss your 1st, 2nd, and a ton other amendments goodbye.

    There's a ton about Trump to hate (Tariffs, etc), but Libertarians are getting more out of Trump then they ever would have out of Clinton. Prove me wrong.

  • Salmonsnail||

    You're missing #MichaelCohencooperating

  • po||

    Lol you count on that one!!

    #FutileEndeavors

    Lolololo

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Trump is wonderful on immigration amd ok on healthcare.

  • KevinP||

    Frankly, Trump, against all odds, is turning out to be the most libertarian President in a generation.

  • Jerryskids||

    Most libertarian in a generation? Most libertarian since Reagan, who was the most libertarian since Coolidge, who in turn was the most libertarian since WH Harrison, the original libertarian president.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I never really understood the PePe the Frog meme, but the smug frog seems to communicate the kind of schadenfreude I feel seeing progressive flail about after they've been handed their asses to wear as a hat.

    LOL

  • Ken Shultz||

    Here, I'm done whipping your ass for the moment, progressives. It's nice and red.

    Try it on! Wear it as a hat.

    Looks good on you, Asshat!

    LOL

  • Caphon||

    "But what if the Republican ranks don't hold?"
    What, you mean after midterms? You think they'll wait that long to confirm Kennedy's replacement? On what planet would they wait, when the list is already built, they hold a majority and there's a risk (albeit slight) that the midterms could corrupt this?

  • John||

    They were smart enough to roll the dice on refusing to confirm Garland. That really surprised me. So, maybe they will surprise you here.

  • DaveSs||

    They could do it from November to Jan 3rd.
    Of course if they lost the majority and subsequently did confirm someone in that time period, the left would go absolutely bonkers in a way that makes the present level of bonkers look like a minor temper tantrum.

  • Caphon||

    Again, why wait until midterms. They have a pre-vetted list they just need to dust off, assuming they didn't already know about Kennedy's intentions months ago, and a Senate that's anxious to walk their nominee through. There's no factor that makes waiting a likely or sensible play right now.

  • DaveSs||

    I don't see any reason why they ought to wait either.

    Just saying that even if they did wait, and they lost the majority, they would still have the option to make a confirmation.

  • Reshufflex||

    Naploitano said Kennedy told him some ago, post-Scalia, that he'd retire if Trump won. Sure enough

  • Reshufflex||

    Some "time" edit

  • vek||

    That can be interpreted 2 ways... But the way that makes the most sense is he would only retire if an R was in to offer up his replacement. That's pretty sweet of him, especially since he is a "moderate" conservative.

  • Napoleon Bonaparte||

    Maybe he'll nominate Jeff Sessions and kill two birds with one stone.

  • M Scott Eiland||

    "Justice Kennedy resigns: fans of gratuitous invocations of foreign law hardest hit."

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Foreign law.........

    If foreigners were os great they would be Americans.

  • Rockabilly||

    It's the end of the world as we knows it and I feels fine...

  • Conchfritters||

    REM sucks worse than the Eagles.

  • JesseAz||

    That's because the eagles are awesome.

  • texexpatriate||

    Isn't it about time that writers quit using the word gay to mean homosexual? The misuse of the word has got to start somewhere, so what not start it here on Reason?

  • Eidde||

    LGBLT+, hold the cake

  • Reshufflex||

    I'm sorry, but that's really funny.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    That descriminates against gay cakes.

  • Nardz||

    Gay

  • Harvard||

    I was fine with queer. Descriptive, and it had a nice ring to it.

  • Rat on a train||

    Need a new term. How about pemmaphile.

  • Enemy of the State||

    The collective heads of the Left have exploded. The wailing and gnashing of teeth over at the WaPo is hysterical...

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Trump's official long list of 25:

    Amy Coney Barrett of Indiana, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
    Keith Blackwell of Georgia, Supreme Court of Georgia
    Charles Canady of Florida, Supreme Court of Florida
    Steven Colloton of Iowa, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit
    Allison Eid of Colorado, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
    Britt Grant of Georgia, Supreme Court of Georgia
    Raymond Gruender of Missouri, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit
    Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit
    Brett Kavanaugh of Maryland, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
    Raymond Kethledge of Michigan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit
    Joan Larsen of Michigan, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit
    Mike Lee of Utah, senator
    Thomas Lee of Utah, Supreme Court of Utah
    Edward Mansfield of Iowa, Supreme Court of Iowa
    Federico Moreno of Florida, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
    Kevin Newsom of Alabama, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit
    William Pryor of Alabama, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit

    cont'd

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    Margaret Ryan of Virginia, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
    David Stras of Minnesota, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit
    Diane Sykes of Wisconsin, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
    Amul Thapar of Kentucky, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit
    Timothy Tymkovich of Colorado, U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
    Robert Young of Michigan, Supreme Court of Michigan (retired)
    Don Willett of Texas, Supreme Court of Texas
    Patrick Wyrick of Oklahoma, Supreme Court of Oklahoma

  • Reshufflex||

    M. Shumway Lee. Even-money.

  • Weigel's Cock Ring||

    He would probably be my #2 preference on this list after Willett. A great choice indeed!

  • Citizen X||

    Willett would rule, though.

  • Conchfritters||

    Lee would be a slam dunk. And those backslappers in the Senate would easily give him the votes.

  • Enemy of the State||

    The collective heads of the Left have exploded. The wailing and gnashing of teeth over at the WaPo is hysterical...

  • DrZ||

    Oh goodie! Things were getting boring. This should liven up the national discussion.

  • Sigivald||

    Prediction: We'll get a moderate center-right professional with impeccable credentials, barely.

    And the Progressives will tell me the world has already ended.

  • Juice||

    Please be another Gorsuch or better and not another Alito or worse!

  • Conchfritters||

    I just hope we don't get Soutered.

  • Cynical Asshole||

    Kennedy's retirement comes at a loaded moment in American politics. As things stand now, Senate Republicans have the votes—but just barely—to approve whatever nominee President Trump puts forward as a replacement. But what if the Republican ranks don't hold?

    And then of course there are the Democrats, who will undoubtedly mount a massive political attack on whatever nominee Trump puts forward.

    *pops popcorn*

    This ought to be entertaining.

  • XM||

    Does no one here care that Korea eliminated Germany, the defending World Cup champions?

  • Shirley Knott||

    Nope.

  • Pro Libertate||

    You know, there are no requirements of any kind for who can sit on the Court. Technically, the coach of the German national team become a justice. A computer could. A blog. Anything.

  • Nardz||

    Yes.
    F Germany!

  • Rat on a train||

    Did they use nukes?

  • jph12||

    Pretty sure Mexico cares.

  • Sevo||

    "With Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announcing his retirement Wednesday, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., quickly joined some fellow Democrats in calling for the vote for his replacement to be delayed until after the midterm elections in November."
    https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/
    Kamala-Harris-kennedy-replacement
    -midterms-durbin-13031372.php

    And if he doesn't, she'll call him a big poopy-head or something!

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Why does she want to wait until the republicans pick off a few seats? Is she delusional enough to believe, in an election cycle where the economy is ok and improving, where the dems have nothing to run on other than hysterical bleating, and where dems are defending into 25 seats, that they are going to flip the senate?

    Sure they will.

  • letters2mary||

    Deeply shallow reflection on a career spanning decades. Gay rights and abortion, hi ho! Go no further than those two issues, and stick with the binary stupidity of "sides." The strength of the Court is in its freedom from "sides." The Court's task is to say what the law is, not whose "side" is right.

    As with all else in the current moment, those who are desperate to retain their positions will do all things possible to ensure that no confirmation occurs in the near term. That way the United States can suffer again with a less than full complement of justices, which is, of course, of secondary importance to reelection.

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    The court has the illusion of sides because democrats nominate Marxist leaning ideologues who have little use for the constitution.

  • letters2mary||

    Deeply shallow reflection on a career spanning decades. Gay rights and abortion, hi ho! Go no further than those two issues, and stick with the binary stupidity of "sides." The strength of the Court is in its freedom from "sides." The Court's task is to say what the law is, not whose "side" is right.

    As with all else in the current moment, those who are desperate to retain their positions will do all things possible to ensure that no confirmation occurs in the near term. That way the United States can suffer again with a less than full complement of justices, which is, of course, of secondary importance to reelection.

  • Brian||

    Priceless.

  • TeamsterX||

    Trump should nominate Mueller, once he is confirmed...nominate the Special counsel that was put in place for the Mueller Bribery to replace Ginsburg.

    Ultimate Troll...
    "Not a perfect President, but made Rushmore for his Trolling".

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    If he really wanted them to lose their shit, he would nominate Ann Coulter.

  • Harvard||

    New Supreme nomination. May go out on a limb here and suggest McCain will vote against anyone Trump nominates. It's getting harder to garner headlines and he's running out of time for more "maverick" grandstanding.

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    I agree, I don't know if it is a lock that Trump gets to appoint the judge he prefers. Because of what happened with Gorsuch all gloves are off and Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans can basically do anything that is possible with no respect for precedent.

  • ||

    Richard Epstein for SCOTUS. That is all. Maybe, you heard it here first.

  • SamHell||

    No mention of fucking us over by not overturing the ACA?

  • Agammamon||

    IIRC, Obama got two appointments.

    Trump's gotten one and we're still one short on the SC? This will give him two and an excuse for a third? That's a hell of a lot of turnover in a decade. RBG leaves? She's going to have to hold on and hope Trump doesn't get a second term or he's going to be able to pack the court like nobody' business.

    I don't know. Maybe its good if he can, maybe its horrible. Obama had one good pick and one that's . . . not horrible 100% of the time. Trump's thrown in Gorsuch, if he can at least hit 50/50 then it might be ok.

  • Harvard||

    It's been whispered that Clarence Thomas longs for retirement. Time is ripe if he would like to see someone like himself but 25 years younger. I'd pay cash money to watch the confirmation hearings for a black, woman hard liner.

  • vek||

    As much as I like Thomas, because I agree with his hardcoreness on a lot of important issues, it would strategically be a good thing if he retired. I suppose I hope he does, provided Trump doesn't bow to pressure to even allow a "moderate" into the court.

  • ||

    Thomas is a better jurist than Scalia IMO. Scalia was a better writer and his opinions had some really witty lines. But Thomas's IDGAF attitude about stare decisis is what makes him better to me.

    I don't want Thomas to go anywhere. But if he truly wants to retire, now is the time. Maybe if the Senate stays Republican during the midterms, 2019 would be a good time to ride off into the sunset.

  • vek||

    Yeah, that's the bummer. He's pretty much the best guy in there! Striking down BS past decisions is EXACTLY what needs to happen if we ever want to fix this country, ESPECIALLY some of the horrible FDR era ones that enabled the insane federal government we have now.

    But he's also old... He should have a chance to enjoy his last few years on earth, and also give the country a shot at getting a solid replacement.

  • Agammamon||

    Three - I miscounted.

  • Sevo||

    "I don't know. Maybe its good if he can, maybe its horrible. Obama had one good pick and one that's . . . not horrible 100% of the time. Trump's thrown in Gorsuch, if he can at least hit 50/50 then it might be ok."

    I'm also not thrilled at some of the long-list names, but, but, but...
    I am sighing with relief that the hag has not been handed such opportunities to screw the republic.

  • Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland||

    Wingnuts won't know what packing the court is until a Democratic Congress and Democratic president enlarge the Court to the degree necessary to overcome the wingnut wing of that Court. I'm guessing four new positions should be about right, for starters.

  • Jack Klompus Magic Ink||

    The day you die a vicious, ugly, violent death will be declared a national day of celebration.

  • Sevo||

    Much preferred it be a long and painful one to mimic our suffering from this asshole.

  • a tandem||

    Arthur -- still waiting for your numbers to back up you claim that more guns in the US caused US gun homicide rates to "skyrocketed" the past generation. They went down, and the numbers on that have nothing to do with the CDC being prohibited from giving money to gun control adovacy researches.

    And all the court packing schemes (enlarging the courts) will likely benefit the GOP long term

  • Chereth Cutestory maritime aty||

    Ref, it's funny you think they will get away with that. It's also funny you think your fellow travelers will be in such a position anytime soon. At their current rate of collapse, they will be incarcerated en masses fairly soon as they aggressively cross the line to outright sedition. Auntie Maxine came close this last week.

    You people are your own worst enemies.

  • DarrenM||

    In short, thanks to Kennedy's retirement, all hell is about to break loose.

    This should be interesting.

  • chemjeff radical individualist||

    The sad part is, the courts and executive orders are where most of the action is nowadays. Congress remains AWOL. So who is going to replace the swing vote on SCOTUS gets more attention to who is going to be the swing vote in the Senate or the House after the next election. It's completely backwards.

  • Robert Crim||

    A religious attack on Obergefell probably still won't work -- but a medically based attack well might. The opinion (and its precedents) rests on sand (recall Bowers v. Hardwick at one time was good law), and on my personal knowledge, the Court was denied access to an amicus brief raising just that issue because a demodonkey clerk seized it and locked it in a drawer until after submissions were closed.

    The fundamental problem is this: Marriage is a contract between a man and a woman in which the rights and obligations of the parties are asymmetric and sex-specific. At some point, a county clerk is going to refuse a marriage license, then, after she is hauled before a fuming district court judge, say the magic words: "It was not legally possible for me to comply with the court's previous order because compliance required issuance of a legal nullity."

    And, that opens the question to why it is a nullity, and whether States, to protect public health, may keep the definition of "marriage" restricted to exclude same-sex couples.

    I know I'll get a lot of fiery whining on this, but I am reporting the truth.

    Readers have every right to their own opinion but not to their own facts.

    And, the constitution of the State of Florida still says what it says.

  • Agammamon||

    What legal obligations in marriage are sex dependent?

  • Robert Crim||

    In a same-sex marriage, who gets dower, who gets curtesy? In a same-sex marriage, who has the obligation of domicile, who the obligation of support? And, should both partners engage in a minor crime such as, e.g., filing a dangerous tax return, in a same-sex marriage, which one enjoys the defense of coercion? The first to think of it? The first to get into court? The one the judge deems "prettiest"? Or maybe the one with the wherewithal to jump up and down before the justice of the peace and shout, "I get to be the mommy!"

    And I could go on.

    More problems the Court probably didn't think about: Joe has a sex-change operation (he's a man impersonating a woman with a surgical assist). Ken is deceived by Joe's representations that Joe really is female and marries him, but eventually he learns of the deception and demands an annulment. Can he get one as a matter of law? Prior to Obergefell, the clear answer was "yes" (a same-sex "marriage" is a nullity, regardless of whether you fool your partner or the clerk of the court). But now?

    These are real problems in family law that have come up before and will come up again. And, the bottom line is that the Obergefell court simply papered them over, upon Justice Kennedy's personal "feeling" that Hardwick was wrongly decided.

    Well, maybe it was wrongly decided; but, my guess is whoever Trump nominates to fill Kennedy's place will "feel" otherwise.

  • Sevo||

    Robert Crim|6.27.18 @ 11:19PM|#
    "In a same-sex marriage, who gets dower, who gets curtesy? In a same-sex marriage, who has the obligation of domicile, who the obligation of support? And, should both partners engage in a minor crime such as, e.g., filing a dangerous tax return, in a same-sex marriage, which one enjoys the defense of coercion? The first to think of it? The first to get into court? The one the judge deems "prettiest"? Or maybe the one with the wherewithal to jump up and down before the justice of the peace and shout, "I get to be the mommy!"
    And I could go on."

    Oh, look! Poor bobby is worried that no one cares about his penis anymore!
    What a shame, you fucking imbecile.

  • Agammamon||

    Dower and curtsy refer to the same thing. and they don't exist as seperate things.

    in a opposite marriage, same as a same sex marriage, the law does not specify who must provide housing or support.

    defense of coercion? the spouse who didn't plan and mastermind the crime - whatever their sex.

    its like you're taking 300 year old common law and expecting it to be applied as-is in the modern us.

  • Agammamon||

    the law doesn't provide anullments. it provides divorces.

    churches provide annullments - and the law can't make them do that.

  • Sebastian Cremmington||

    3 of the first 6 American presidents didn't have children and all of them liked to spend long periods of time away from their wives in the company of men.

  • Reshufflex||

    My wife's a beauty, but if I got a call to rendezvous with George, John and Tom, eta al, well, I'd roll, too. At worst I'm smoking a stoogie near the Liberty Bell or playing cards with Madison.

  • Reshufflex||

    Stogie, et al

  • Agammamon||

    yeah, 'smoking a stogie'

  • vek||

    That's because women are fucking lame dude. Every man knows this. Hanging out with women is a total drag compared to partying with male friends. Women are nice for sex, and cuddling, washing dishes, and some other stuff, but even my best female friends/partners were nowhere near as awesome to just hang out with as my guy friends.

    THIS STUFF IS KNOWN.

  • Sevo||

    "The fundamental problem is this: Marriage is a contract between a man and a woman in which the rights and obligations of the parties are asymmetric and sex-specific."
    That was true when it was Ug and Oga who 'married'; not so much anymore

    "I know I'll get a lot of fiery whining on this, but I am reporting the truth."
    No, you're posting some left-over Xian bullshit and claiming 'truth'.

    "Readers have every right to their own opinion but not to their own facts."
    Yeah, you should find some.

  • Robert Crim||

    This is not a response, just someone venting his spleen (which I expected). But, see my additional comments, supra.

  • Sevo||

    Robert Crim|6.27.18 @ 11:23PM|#
    "This is not a response, just someone venting his spleen (which I expected)."
    You're a fucking religious ignoramus, and you were called on your religious bullshit, ignoramus. You should learn to read.

    "But, see my additional comments, supra."
    I see your idiocy above; you are good at posting stupidity. Are you proud, ignoramus?

  • vek||

    Try explaining that there's no difference between the man and the women in a court in 2018 buddy! The divorce and child custody system is still SUPER slanted against men, and in favor of women. But men have lost all the legal perks we used to enjoy with respect to marriage that perhaps made it an overall reasonable arrangement, especially when divorce was a very rare thing.

    There's a reason MGTOW and MRAs etc exist, and it's because of bias in the legal system as it exists to this day.

    He might have gone a bit overboard, but not by much.

  • jdd6y||

    My concern is (a) that Crypt-Keeper McCain who won't resign until his wife gets appointed but is too sick to vote and (b) Collins, Murkowski.

    Perhaps this forces McCain to resign and be replaced by a non-psycopath. And then all these red state dems have to choose between voting for Trump's nominee or losing their election on the grounds they didn't.

    Hopefully, there is another Gorsuch type out there or maybe even more libertarianish.

  • Bob Meyer||

    McCain will live to vote against any of Trump's nominees even if he has to drink the blood of virgins and swear allegiance to the Dark Powers. He can't sell his soul, it hasn't been his for years.

  • buybuydandavis||

    I swoon in the river of Leftist tears.

  • swampwiz||

    What we are going to see is not a "true" overturning of Roe, but a chipping away at it so that for states that really want to do it, is essentially overturned. Once that happens (and the rise of Trump has already gotten the ball rolling), women are going to get hyper-motivated to get the SCOTUS to reimplement Roe as a strong judgment. And the game from here on out will be no confirmation of strongly ideological SCOTUS justices unless there is unitary control, and the SCOTUS will be enlarged to give the new unitary regime the balance of the Court.

    I could also see an amendment to the Constitution guaranteeing the right to abortion. Anecdotally, In my circle of female acquaintances who up until now were mild Republicans, it's war.

  • Reshufflex||

    Roe's going nowhere. Been here @ 50 years. It's the sword of Damocles that the lunatic fringe wields every stinkin'time the enemy shows up at SCOTUS, quietly knocking for entry. They know Roe aint going to be gutted, but that's their tidy little secret. The whole charade, their fake scream, is the current version of Hannibal ad portas!

  • ||

    I agree with this but if Trump replaces Ginsberg or Breyer (or both), I could see Roe being overturned and the power going back to the states. I am pro-choice and think Roe is one of the worst decisions of the past 50 years.

    Mt two cents that no one asked for or probably cares about.

  • Robert Crim||

    Well, the Equal Rights Amendment continues to languish, and other than its unpredictability -- it's vague enough to mean anything -- there's little controversial about it.

    But, you're going to get 37 States to ratify a pro-abortion amendment? After getting two-thirds of Congress to propose it?

    This will be interesting.

  • Sevo||

    Well, bobby's penis doesn't mean shit to anyone and bobby is pissed.

  • Johnny B||

    It had 7 years to pass, that boat has sailed.

  • Vicki Henry||

    The most notable thing Justices Kennedy and Roberts have accomplished is ruining the lives of 900,000 registered citizens and their families (3 million) by quoting a statement by a therapist in Psychology Today in 1986 concerning an erroneous 80% recidivism rate which went on to be included in over 100 cases across the nation. The collateral damage is ongoing and we will see if SCOTUS grants cert in the Colorado case ruling by Judge Matsch and if the Solicitor General suggests it apply to all registered citizens not just the three individuals. Google: Frightening and High by Ira and Tara Ellman. Women Against Registry

  • Sevo||

    It seems you can't provide a link to this 'very important' issue?
    Guess it's not that important.

  • a tandem||

    Great we have the child molesters chiming in against Kennedy and Roberts

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Too bad Hillary didn't get elected, or this could have been a historic moment. We could have had our first black Supreme Court Justice. But, alas, Trump will pick another white dude.

  • Reshufflex||

    Huh?

  • Reshufflex||

    Huh?

  • Robert Crim||

    I think he's calling Marshall and Thomas "Oreo cookies."

  • Rufus T. Firefly.||

    All we need is some fucking Nickleback to get this party started.

  • UltraModerate||

    Well, this will certainly get Democrats out to the polls in November.

  • Robert Crim||

    And Trump on Labor Day will announce that the trade talks were successful, and that we're not going to have a trade war with China after all. The market will explode, and so will the demodonkeys' chances.

    Repubs will pick up 4-6 senate seats (you heard it here first).

  • UltraModerate||

    And Santa Claus will deliver it all in his big red sleigh, right? Trump is going to announce that the trade talks were successful whether they were or not. Only fools like you will believe him without proof. I think it's past your bedtime, Robert.

  • Incomprehensible Bitching||

    Cant Maters!

  • ||

    Fools will believe Trump if the economy keeps humming along as it is and then picks up when he makes some sort of silly announcement. Trump is a showman, and a good one. I used to think he was a dumb bumbling moron. Then I thought maybe he is some sort of sneaky genius. Now I just think he is a showman like PT Barnum and has a knack for keeping the crowd interested and drawing in bigger and bigger audiences.

  • UltraModerate||

    By the way, I didn't hear the "red wave" delusion from you first, or even second or third. You guys have been spouting about that for a year and a half already, despite history not being on your side in the slightest. If we're going to use history as an indicator, these things will happen:

    - Republicans, being placated by their wins, will show up in smaller numbers. The true believers will show up, of course, but you can forget about a lot of the low income guys who have to work that day.

    - Democrats, being energized, encouraged by 50+ election wins in the last year, and pissed about what the GOP is doing, will show up in droves.

    - The GOP will lose at least one house of Congress, definitely the House, and will lose probably 2-3 Senate seats.

    - Trump, like most businessman presidents, will leave the country in a recession or depression, despite having a strong economy when he started.

  • a tandem||

    Data indicate it will bring more GOP to the polls

  • UltraModerate||

    Source?

  • Dread Pirate Roberts||

    Lefties haven't had this much rage since yesterday.

  • vek||

    I know! ... It's so fucking great!

  • vek||

    ALL THE WINNING

    There has been quite a run of awesomeness lately. The pain on the left gives me great joy. In this instance I hope Trump appoints a hardcore mutha, and not a swing votey kind of tool. Obviously a libertarian bent would be nice, but even just a solid constitutionalist conservative would be fine by me.

    Now if Thomas would retire (I'll miss him, but it makes sense strategically), and then 1-2 lefty judges would die... We might have a solid SC for a couple decades no matter who wins coming elections. That really could hold back the statists quite a bit, as it would force them to not get half the crap they want through, or to simply completely ignore how our system works and defy the court, thus setting them up to try to pull and coup, which would allow them to be deposed. Either way a win.

  • a tandem||

    If you read up on heavily Dem sites, including sites with DNC insiders, this is all bad, a lose-lose. They will lose on blocking any nomination , they actually will lose votes in purple close states if they make big deal of this. Even Twitter lighting up is bad for the DNC since they are losing control of shaping the debate.

    It is literally the worst possible timing for Democrats. Of all possible 48 months for Kennedy announcing to retire, June-July 2018 ranks as the worst timing for Democrats to respond to either stop a Trump nomination or even use it to advantage in midterms.

    Kennedy stuck the left and DNC in the eye and twisted it: he is not just retiring, he has picked the moment with the worst possible outcomes for the Democrats.

  • wreckinball||

    Nominate Gorsuch II
    Short circuit all of the stupid D stonewalling antics
    Take a vote

  • WJack||

    Time out to give thanks Hillary lost!

  • Sevo||

    I was considering that last night. If that hag had two nominations, we could forget A-1 and A-2; toast.

  • Good backlink||

    Yes, the only reason the GOP would defect is if Trump appointed someone complete retarded!!!

  • Duelles||

    If Hell is sin sickness and death. . . It s here to stay. Unlike Supreme Court justices! I heard a that MIT fed a computer the Constitution and all old Supreme Court cases for an AI SCOTUS thing. . . The computer set itself on fire.

  • Johnny B||

    I guess Hiln and Tony didn't have anything to say...

  • Deplorable Victor||

    Good! Bring it libs! We'll pave the streets with your hides.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online