Clarence Thomas may be next to leave Supreme Court
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2594317/Clarence Thomas may be next to leave Supreme Court
By Paul Bedard (@SecretsBedard) • 6/19/16 11:40 AM
Justice Clarence Thomas, a reliable conservative vote on the Supreme Court, is mulling retirement after the presidential election, according to court watchers.
Thomas, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush and approved by the Senate after a bitter confirmation, has been considering retirement for a while and never planned to stay until he died, they said. He likes to spend summers in his RV with his wife.
His retirement would have a substantial impact on control of the court. The next president is expected to immediately replace the seat opened by the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, providing a one-vote edge in the court that is currently divided 4-4.
Should Thomas leave, that slight majority would continue if Donald Trump becomes president. If it's Hillary Clinton, then she would get the chance to flip two Republican seats, giving the liberals a 6-3 majority.
And, conservatives fear, that could switch to a 7-2 majority if Republican Justice Anthony Kennedy, already a swing vote, retires. He will be 80 next year.
We recently reported that if Clinton wins the presidency, her majority liberal court could stay in power at least until 2050.
= new reply since forum marked as read
She's been blamed for all of those throughout the entire campaign season, but judicial appointments are off limits because they don't fit the narrative??
Ya'll can't have it both ways.
It's also completely strawman that the supposition that she and her husband are aligned because she doesn't have a mind of her own. Show me a single source where she in any way shape or form disagreed with Bill on his Scotus appointments. *que the cricket music*
?itok=DTxEh_fK
...between Hillary Clinton versus Donald Trump appointing a justice to fill the vacancies on the Supreme Court.
Seriously, anyone who is trying to minimize the difference, and suggest that Hillary Clinton is going to appoint right wing judges should just leave the site. The attacks on Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a Clinton appointee, as being a corporatist? 
Ruth Bader Ginsburg has done more for gender equality than any so-called liberal nominee that anyone could come up with. I bet you cannot come up with one individual who should be nominated for the Supreme Court who has had a better record fighting for gender equality. Folks should take a moment to think before posting material that is demonstrably false. 
to wait until the next election, or the next one, or the next one; whenever a republican assumes the presidency, which, I hope, never again happens.
wishful thinking, I know, but hey.....
they won't even vote on the guy who's in charge of monitoring ISIS money raising, etc. how come nobody's talking about that?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/republicans-national-security-nominee-isis_us_564d0250e4b08c74b7344681
In the aftermath of the Paris terrorist attacks, Senate Democrats on Wednesday criticized Republicans for blocking national security nominees who would help fight terrorism and track Islamic State militants.
The delay on one of those nominees is particularly puzzling. Adam Szubin, who has bipartisan support, has been waiting more than 200 days to be confirmed as the Treasury Department’s under secretary for terrorism and financial crimes. The job involves tracking terrorists to prevent them from raising money on the black market and elsewhere.
Szubin’s nomination got a hearing before the Senate Banking Committee on Sept. 17, and Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) praised his past work in countering terrorist financing during his time with both Republican and Democratic administrations. “He is eminently qualified for this,” Shelby said at the time.
But Szubin’s nomination hasn’t moved since. There’s no clear reason why, beyond trying to make it difficult for President Barack Obama to fill administration posts.
somebody should be talking about this all the time. WTF are they thinking? how do the stalling ISIS enablers in the senate get away with this? again, WTF??????????
thanks, you (insert expletive here): _________________________.
That means Madam President will choose TWO USSC justices. Fine with me.
maybe he can get a job over at his wife's (Ginni) super pac's "Ground Swell" or Swill or "Freedom Works' or better yet "True the Vote", he would fit in quite well with these groups, since he gave them carte blanche in his infamous rulings
Honk----------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016
every American would like to have a conversation with.
So, Clarence, did you ever play sports? Tennis? Basketball?
Wouldn't it be a major hoot if Hillary nominated ex-president Barak Obama to the bench?
Or, if he's not interested Michelle Obama!
Either is more qualified than other justices that have been nominated to the bench.
Oh, I grin evilly just at the thought of all the right wing talking heads exploding at just the prospect of a nomination of either!
In fact, why wait? Nobody lives forever and we should enjoy each day like its our last. Do it now! Retire. You need a break after all your hard work all these years. I'm sure Trump will take care of the court.
What will suck is that it'll be Hillary's picks which will rule the direction is SCOTUS for a generation. It'll be better than the one for the last generation but we had a chance to have another (mostly) FDR one
please, Clarence... think of those swell summers in the RV!
One more reason to vote for Hillary!
Guess you don't like them?
What makes you think Hillary would appoint conservatives, Rick?
What would Thomas Paine say?
Don't you think it's a bit childish?
I bet they have a hokey airbrushed spare tire cover that says The Thomas'.
Looking forward to this bastard's endless summer, far from the SCOTUS.
