Kavanaugh will be only one justice out of nine

[onenote]

Some of the more hyperbolic posts seem to suggest that if Kavanaugh gets on the court (and he will), all sorts of horrific changes are coming. I have no doubt that Roe v. Wade will be at risk. But contraception? Not unless you think that there are four other Justices currently on the Court that would overrule Griswold. And if that's the case, then it doesn't matter if its Kavanaugh or someone else Trump nominates -- that person isn't going to be less conservative than the other four republicans on the court.

To put it another way, either Kavanaugh is far to the right of the other conservatives on the court, which means he can't put his most conservative views into place because he won't find four others to join him. Or he's not far to the right of them, in which case whether its Kavanaugh or some other Trump nominee, the results are going to be the same.

[sinkingfeeling]

1. I believe there are 4 other equally 'conservative' judges already there.

As you said, ..."whether it's Kavanaugh or some other Trump nominee, the results are going to be the same."
The election is coming. We must attempt to stop the GOP from packing the court

[Atticus]

2. Didn't you just skip right past some salient facts?

1.) Trump is an illegitimate POTUS. Without criminal gerrymandering, voter suppression and traitorous conspiracy with Putin, he would be a comical footnote in US history.

2.) No vote on ANY SCOTUS nominee should occur until Judge Garland gets a vote.

3.) Trump specifically promised, during his campaign, to appoint a SCOTUS justice who would oveturn Roe v. Wade.

4.) Kavanaugh lied under oath during his 2006 confirmation and, so far, has perjured himself 5 times this week.

5.). Kavanaugh's name was added to the Federalist Society "list" only after the Mueller appointment and he is the ONLY judge on that list who takes the position that a sitting president can't be sued, indicted, subpoenaed or even investigated.

6.). The corrupt and complicit GOP leadership has repeatedly vio!ated Senate rules and "hidden" over 100,000 pages of Kavanaugh's record in order to cram this most unpopular SCOTUS nominee in our lifetime into a lifetime seat of power before the midterms.

In view of these and other considerations, your minimization of the Kavanaugh confirmation is puzzling, at the least. Your characterization of posts predicting horrific consequences as"hyperbolic" is insensitive, at best.

[milestogo]

4. + a brazillion

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

5. THIS!!!!

[oberliner]

6. Do you think he will end up being confirmed?

[Atticus]

7. Yes. nt

[Eliot Rosewater]

28. Of course, the GOP desire to kill disobedient women and POC who like to vote and eat, much

stronger than their patriotism.

[onenote]

8. Those points aren't "salient" to the point I was making.

But by way of clarification:

1. I don't want Kavanaugh confirmed. I don't want any nominee made by Trump to be confirmed.
2. But the reality is that he will be confirmed, something you acknowledge further down this thread.

So....back to my point. The issue is whether the other justices also take the position that a sitting president can't be sued, indicted, or even investigated. If we assume that the four Democratic appointees don't take that position, then the issue is whether all four of the Republicans do. If they all do, then its entirely likely, that while we may not know what the other potential nominees think about that question, it is not unreasonable to think that they would agree with the other four. If that assumption is incorrect -- that Kavanaugh stands alone in his thinking, then he stands alone and his extreme position will not carry the day.

That was my point -- that given the reality, which you concede, that Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed despite his prevarications and extreme partisanship -- then the practical consequences of his being confirmed are not all that different than the practical consequences of any of the other potential nominees being confirmed (unless you think that Trump would confirm someone with views to the 'left' of Roberts, Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch).

[Atticus]

9. Your " point" still seems to be: "Kavanaugh? Meh---". nt

[onenote]

10. My point is that freaking out over his positions as if they're different from Gorsuch et al

doesn't make much sense to me.

And again, in case you missed, I don't want any Trump nominee to the court confirmed. Not just Kavanaugh.

[Atticus]

11. Ok. nt

[Eliot Rosewater]

29. Whether that is what the poster meant or not it is how it comes out and we need to be

aware of MESSAGING.

Things we say HERE does get out THERE

I wish the poster would change the OP

[Hortensis]

13. Onenote, these 4 created religious rights for

not just family owned corporations but limited corporations that sell some shares to the public, which was as far as they could go at the time. Judicial activists who believe in restyling the constitution to serve the few over the many. Gorsuch was appointed to join 3 sitting justices with authoritarian bents who support criminalizing abortion, among many other things most Americans do not support. That makes 4.

This is them on a rein. I think we should assume that 5 will be more extreme than you imagine.

[fescuerescue]

20. I don't think that #4 is going to happen

"No vote on ANY SCOTUS nominee should occur until Judge Garland gets a vote. "

It sure is a nice thing to wish for, but I doubt if Garland will ever get a vote. Certainly not under Trump and doubtful under the next Democrat.

[Eliot Rosewater]

27. That you had to take the time to write this, HERE, sigh. But thank you for doing it

[exboyfil]

3. Alito, Thomas, and Gorsuch

are just as conservative as Kavanaugh. They all owe allegiance to the same organizations. Roberts is almost as bad, and his tenure as Chief Justice will be defined by how he now votes.

Birth control falls under the same basic umbrella as abortion. It will now depend on state legislators going forward. Basically what will the public stand in the individual states. Burger and Rehnquist dissented on Carey. Where do you think they would fit on the continuum in today's court?

[SoCalDem]

12. added to his band of brothers (the other 4 nutcases)

he becomes the 5th..

5 to 4 always carries the day..

don't believe it? ask Al Gore

[ecstatic]

14. On AM Joy, the point was raised that even a single dissenting vote, for example to ignore subpoena,

could be used by trump to justify ignoring court rulings.

I get it, you're probably in the bargaining phase, but unfortunately all of our worst fears have been realized thus far and there's no reason to think this will be any different.

[Hekate]

15. Holy crap, you think birth control is not also at risk? And you minimize the risk to Roe?

The RWNJ has gone out of its way to define the most widely-used contraceptive methods as abortifacients. They aren't, but no matter.

Where have you been the past 30+ years? Damn, I can't even...

[onenote]

16. My point is that if its at risk because Kavanaugh gets on the court

then it will be at risk if Trump had to name someone other than Kavanaugh.


I don't how many other ways to say it.

[Hekate]

17. This kind of reminds me of the GOP legislator who said of rape: If it's inevitable, relax & enjoy it

No, onenote. Just no. This is wrong. It wll be wrong the next time. And the next and the next.

Don't equivocate. RESIST.

[onenote]

18. You obviously haven't bothered to read my posts in this thread

I made it clear that I don't want Kavanaugh to be confirmed. I don't want anyone Trump nominates confirmed.

Is that clear enough for you? Because your post was grotesquely offensive.

[fescuerescue]

19. Along with Thomas, Alito, gorsuch, and roberts

All extremist and now a majority.

[onenote]

21. Which means it doesn't matter whether its Kavanaugh or some other Trump appointee

The results would be same, right?

Again, because somehow people seem to misunderstand my point: I don't want Kavanaugh to be confirmed. I don't want any Trump nominee to be confirmed.

But, the reality is that whether its Kavanaugh or some other Trump nominee -- unless there is a way to stop the repubs from confirming someone (and right now there is no clear path to that result) -- the substantive outcome is the same.

[WillowTree]

23. Galant effort, onenote....................

[fescuerescue]

35. The next one will be worse

That's a general rule actually.

The current Republican is always worse than the last one.

Hell, there's actually posts on here praising GW now.

[onenote]

36. Sometimes the next one is better, but I doubt this would be the case with Trump

But I'm curious where you get the idea that it's a "general rule" that the nominee that follows a failed nominee is worse than the failed nominee. Was Blackmun worse than Carswell? Was Kennedy worse than Bork?

[fescuerescue]

37. Those are all before my experience

And I'm talking general politics of the last 20 years.

It's just a trend that I have observed. NOthing deeper than that.

[onenote]

38. Hard to see a trend in one example

The only time in the past 20 years that a president has had a nominee fail and then had to nominate someone else was Bush's failed nomination of Harriet Meirs, which led to the nomination of Alito.

In that case, the subsequent nominee probably was worse than Meirs, although its difficult to say since she was considered unqualified by both repubs and Democrats.


Obviously, Gorsuch was worse than Garland, but that's two different presidents, and thus not a comparable situation.

[fescuerescue]

39. I'm not really interested in arguing this.

I'm just talking about how Republican politicians (not just judges) are usually worse than the last one.

If you want to feel differently. That's ok. But I definitely feel that Trump is worse than Bush and he was worse than Bush Sr etc.

I'm not writing a college paper, or taking a scientific poll. Just talking about what I see and feel.

[Greybnk48]

22. The denigration of the Supreme Court by Republicans

started with that total sleazebag, Clarence Thomas, aka, "Long Dong Silver," married to a foaming at the mouth, mad-dog right winger. Then they tried to stick us with Harriet fucking Meyers, then smooth as silk liars like Roberts and Alito to compliment crude, loud mouthed Scalia.

That's what the "new" Republicans have given us. I have absolutely no confidence that the intelligent, just/fair members of the court will be able to prevail. For me the court is close to a sham, and will be a total sham if Kavanaugh slimes and lies his way on. It's disgusting.

[pnwmom]

24. Five of the Justices would be conservative Catholic men.

I'm not including Sotomayor, who is a liberal, female Catholic.

How do you know conservative Catholic men wouldn't uphold bans on contraception, since abolishing those hinged on the same right to privacy men like Kavanaugh want to repeal now?

Everything in our law that is based on right to privacy is at risk. That also includes LGBT rights -- till not long ago there were still sodomy laws on the books, and they were enforced against gay men.

[onenote]

26. I don't claim to know whether Kavanaugh is or isn't more extreme on those issues

My point, which apparently is too complicated for some to follow, is that if he is more extreme than some or all of the other repubs, for example on whether the president can be subpoenaed, his extreme position isn't going to carry the day. If the other repubs are just as extreme on that question, his vote will carry the day -- but presumably that would be the case no matter who Trump nominated unless you think he's going to nominate someone more moderate than Roberts, Thomas, Alito and Gorsuch.

[cbdo2007]

25. Roberts is conservative but is not extreme

And he is actually well thought out in his opinions and has sided with the Dems a number of times.

There is no way Roberts will overturn RvW and I would guess based on the integrity he has shown thus far, that he doesn't want his court to turn into a joke. He and I may not side the same on many (many) issues but I don't think he's as horrible as many other conservatives.

[Freethinker65]

30. Roberts may not be batshit conservative, but having him as the deciding vote is not encouraging

[guillaumeb]

31. There are 5 conservative Judges on the SCOTUS.

And Kavanaugh is farther to the right than is Kennedy.

[onenote]

34. Agreed

And if they are all equally conservative, then the claims that Kavanaugh's position on Roe, on contraception, on presidential subpoenas are extreme are meaningless -- anyone Trump nominates will have the same positions. He's not nominating another Kennedy.

The best thing would be for Kavanaugh's nomination to fail -- I don't care why, just that it fails. And then for the Democrats to capture the Senate. But my post was based on the presumption, made here by many, that Kavanaugh is likely to be confirmed.

[DFW]

32. Keddedy is nowhere nearly as fanatic as Kavanaugh, and nowhere nearly as dishonest

Plus Kennedy is in his seventies. Kavanaugh could be on the Court for 30 years if he is not impeached and removed.

That's not "just one justice." That will be justice denied for a few dozen million Americans. Besides, if the Kavanaugh nomination fails, Trump won't get a chance until the next Congress is seated. Trump may not care, but I don't think McTurtle and Grassley want to toss those dice.

[onenote]

33. And there is zero chance that Trump would nominate someone like Kennedy

And for the umpteenth time -- I don't want Kavanaugh confirmed. I don't want anyone Trump can come up with confirmed. I'm simply addressing the fears of those who say Kavanaugh is much more extreme than anyone else Trump could come up with. I don't know that to be the case -- I doubt it. But even if Kavanaugh is more extreme than anyone on the court now or anyone that Trump could come up with, then he will find himself not having the support of not only the four Democrats, but of one or more of the allegedly less extreme republicans.