The terrifying and terrible prospect of Justice Kennedy retiring

The best case scenario (for the LW) would be Trump picks Kennedy's replacement, but that's it.

But, even those 2 picks (replacing Scalia and Kennedy) will reshape the court for (at least) a generation.

 

This may go down as Trump's legacy.

 

This would be a devastating blow the the Left. And a wonderful thing for our constitutional structure!

 

Just those 2 new SC justices alone would be enough.

And, in the end, Trump's election was all about the SC.

The Evangelicals forgave the P-grabbing so they could get Trump's SC.

 

Good thing for that Hillary landslide! LOL

You better hope the "liberal" judges dont retire the next 8 years.

 

Hope Trump appoints some young female constitutionalists. Women live longer, and dems can be the party that stalls the historic nomination of women.

 

Because after listening to you lefties we knew you couldn't be trusted with the picks.

 

Personally I hope Trump loads the Supreme court up with all he can and they're nice and young! Speaking as an ex-democrat, absolutely nothing coming from the current progressive Marxism left is good for any nation. All anyone has to do is look at what's happened to the EU due to that same type of mentality to know it simply DOESN'T WORK. Sure it would be a great world if the wealth could be redistributed and spread around more evenly but that would only work if everyone had integrity and worked hard to pull their weight. Since that's clearly not the case because there are so many lazy parasites who feel perfectly entitled to use others, that ideology will never work. All the rabid frothing at the mouth hatred that's being witnessed these days is coming from those entitled parasites who think they deserve to be carried.

 

Amen.

 

Thanks, Harry! You gave us what we needed. Now if the Dims will just keep Pelosi and Schumer in place, that should just about do for them.

 

Not in the United States, no.

In the United States, the Senate confirms nominees.

 

Speaking as a ex-Democrat gives you authority to speak for yourself, an anonymous
source on the internet.

 

Just like you were sure he would get trounced in the general election?

 

Nothing personal:

But, people might actually take you seriously if you laid off the same, tired, played out "liberal tears" memes.

Are you even capable of making more than 5 posts without trotting out a lame meme?

Nothing personal, of course.

Just a friendly suggestion.

And, on topic, to your post:

Trump would do well appointing a 40-year-old ultra conservative female.

 

Totally.

You gotta love pro-Trump trolls pushing his agenda by deceptively referring to themselves as ex-Democrats.

It is so comical, you couldn't make it up.

And, on topic:

Of course Trump is going to appoint a reactionary judge.

 

You sound triggered.
The memes are proving quite effective against lefties.

But not as effective as a conservative SCOTUS majority for the next 3+ decades, ami right?

 

There are lots of ex democrats these days, the party pushed them out, and Trump welcomed them in.

And yet despite this-some still thought Hillary would win in a landslide.

 

No, not anymore, thanks to your own former Senate Majority Leader. Thank him.

 

Perhaps it's time for his departure, this opinion, issued today, is in the weeds.

Cheers


http://dailycaller.com/2017/06/23/supreme-court-limits-rights-of-property-owners/

Supreme Court Limits Rights Of Property Owners
KEVIN DALEY
Legal Affairs Reporter

The Supreme Court constrained the rights of property owners Friday, establishing a test that favors government officials in assessing the loss of property value caused by government regulations.

Writing for a 5-3 court, Justice Anthony Kennedy explained that state and local officials can combine separate parcels of land in assessing whether local government has effectively seized private property through regulation, requiring compensation. Kennedy’s opinion was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts filed a fiery dissent, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

The case concerned a Wisconsin family called the Murrs, who argued that the government has unconstitutionally taken their land by refusing to allow them to sell it.

“This is an unfortunate decision for the Murrs, and all property owners,” said John Groen, general counsel and vice president of the Pacific Legal Foundation, a public interest group that represented the family. “We are disappointed that the Court did not recognize the fundamental unfairness to the Murrs of having their separate properties combined, simply to avoid the protection of the takings clause.”

 

I can't WAIT to get that piece of garbage out. He is the bastard that ignored the law pushing gay marriage on the country and voted for eminent domain. Get that f'n liberal OUT.

We need justices who actually follow the LAW not their personal opinions.

 

I want the troll too. Give her a coin or tell her your favorite color just get that neo liberal Nazi off the bench.

 

Unfortunately liberals believe balance on the Supreme Court is 9-0 in their favor, just like they believe that one Fox News is intolerable.

 

No they don't. Republicans confirm nominees for the next 4 or even 8 years.

Deal with it