-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Trump nominates Brett Kavanaugh
- Thread starter Riders
- Start date
Flame
Beware
NPR did a piece on him.
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/09/6261...h-president-trumps-pick-for-the-supreme-court
He seems fairly moderate under the conservative umbrella. He seems to be a fairly good pick on Trumps part seeing how he opposes lawsuits and criminal investigations on presidents.
https://www.npr.org/2018/07/09/6261...h-president-trumps-pick-for-the-supreme-court
He seems fairly moderate under the conservative umbrella. He seems to be a fairly good pick on Trumps part seeing how he opposes lawsuits and criminal investigations on presidents.
I like the wikipedia writeup https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh which makes him an extreme right wing nominee
Several academic studies that have attempted to measure judges based on their ideology or "Scalia-ness" have included Kavanaugh.
One study "derived ideology scores for the D.C. Circuit judges based on lawyers' (who practiced before these judges) perceptions of the judges' political preferences," with Kavanaugh ranked as the fifth (out of 11) most conservative judge on the court.[53] The same study praised Kavanaugh's "ability to toe a moderate line while ruling predominantly conservatively," as well as "his moderately conservative behavior and his high level of agreement with the other judges on the circuit."[53] The study further observed that "[c]ompared to the recent addition of Justice Gorsuch to the Supreme Court . . . Judge Kavanaugh uses less originalist and textualist language in his opinions although he is well-versed in statutory interpretation."[53]
FiveThirtyEight used Judicial Common Space scores, which are not based on a judge's behavior, but rather the ideology scores of either home state senators or the appointing president, to find that Kavanaugh would likely be more conservative than Justices Alito and Gorsuch, but less conservative than Justice Thomas, if placed on the Supreme Court.[54] The Washington Post's statistical projections predicted that all of Trump's announced candidates were "largely statistically indistinguishable" and estimating that Kavanaugh would place ideologically between Justices Gorsuch and Alito.[55]
Several academic studies that have attempted to measure judges based on their ideology or "Scalia-ness" have included Kavanaugh.
One study "derived ideology scores for the D.C. Circuit judges based on lawyers' (who practiced before these judges) perceptions of the judges' political preferences," with Kavanaugh ranked as the fifth (out of 11) most conservative judge on the court.[53] The same study praised Kavanaugh's "ability to toe a moderate line while ruling predominantly conservatively," as well as "his moderately conservative behavior and his high level of agreement with the other judges on the circuit."[53] The study further observed that "[c]ompared to the recent addition of Justice Gorsuch to the Supreme Court . . . Judge Kavanaugh uses less originalist and textualist language in his opinions although he is well-versed in statutory interpretation."[53]
FiveThirtyEight used Judicial Common Space scores, which are not based on a judge's behavior, but rather the ideology scores of either home state senators or the appointing president, to find that Kavanaugh would likely be more conservative than Justices Alito and Gorsuch, but less conservative than Justice Thomas, if placed on the Supreme Court.[54] The Washington Post's statistical projections predicted that all of Trump's announced candidates were "largely statistically indistinguishable" and estimating that Kavanaugh would place ideologically between Justices Gorsuch and Alito.[55]
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Probably not. He has publicly stated that he supports it. But he is very scary in some of his other stances:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brett_Kavanaugh
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Some of the ideas he has supported are worrisome to say the least. Such as wanting to void attorney client privilege at times. But it could have been worse.
whirlingmerc
Well-Known Member
Interesting... activists judges were good according to the media when Obama nominated them?
And they didn't characterize them as far left liberals
even handed?
The NYT disagrees with you, putting the nominee to the left of Gorsuch.
Ref...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/09/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court.html
Phantasman
Well-Known Member
Let the attorney battle begin. He's a Constitutionalist. Interprets laws, not make the laws.Doubt Roe V Wade will even be an issue since Trump wants the individual states to decide abortion legalization by the state government. A good move, IMO. Why should what California wants decide what Georgians want.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
He has publicly stated that he supports Roe v. Wade. To allow states to totally ban abortion would take an overturn of that decision and that does not look very likely.
Since abortion is a moral issue (between mother and doctor) then why the political issue or political involvement.
I agree regarding the roe vs wade thing. As far as him being a good pick? I don't know much about him, but I hope he is a moderate like Kennedy.
IDK Trump hasn’t got his way even with his last nomination. This judge tends to make both Dems and Repubs angry on the same decisions. Imagine that lol!
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Were they protecting/expanding rights and freedoms, or restricting/removing them?
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
If a southern state wanted to reinstate "Jim Crow" laws, would that be alright with you? Also, if conservatives are big supporters state rights, then why the big stink over individual states legalizing pot and gay marriage (before the federal recognition)?
Phantasman
Well-Known Member
Two different things. Pot should be regulated like alcohol. States have different laws on alcohol, and even counties have different laws being dry. Pot should be no different in the recreational sense. Gay marriage? I couldn't care if someone wants to marry his cow. Marriage is for religious purposes, not government purposes. (except maybe a tax break).
As long as a state follows the US Constitution, Life, Liberty, Pursuit of Happiness, Fruits of ones labors, then I'm fine with it.
Abortion is just a cop out for stupidity, IMO. People know what happens in a sexual act. There are ways to prevent getting pregnant. Yet a potential life has to pay the price for stupidity. "Life" being the first Constitutional right.
Karma is only fair against the whiny anti-Obama congress members who also have to convince a every single Republican in the Senate.Let the circus began, with the Democrats as the clowns
http://www.businessinsider.com/susan-collins-lisa-murkowski-trump-scotus-nominee-abortion-2018-6
Is that a jab at @Father Heathen?Let the circus began, with the Democrats as the clowns
A cow hasn't the mental capacity to give consent.
The inability to give informed consent is why we
don't allow 9 year olds to get married.
Opinions will differ in other countries though.
Marriage seems only religious to some, but it has
legal consequences which matter to us heathens.
It isn't "stupid" to become pregnant due to rape or failed birth control.
Besides, our civil rights are often predicated on having done something
stupid, eg, the right to a lawyer when being prosecuted.
And remember that 91% of people are of below average intelligence.