Report: Trump Rushing to Announce Supreme Court Pick by July 11

[DonViejo]

Source: The Daily Beast



President Trump’s rush to select a replacement for Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy kicked into high gear late Thursday as he met with lawmakers to discuss the high-stakes vacancy and apparently try to woo key Democrats. The president is reportedly hoping to announce his pick before he departs for the NATO summit in Brussels on July 11, but he faces major opposition from Democrats who fear his pick for the post will give the federal judiciary a conservative slant for decades to come. The White House said late Thursday that Trump had met separately with three Republican senators and three red-state Democratic senators: Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia. The three Democrats all broke ranks last year and voted to confirm Trump’s first Supreme Court pick, Judge Neil Gorsuch. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Trump’s meeting with those lawmakers and his contacts with “a dozen other senators” were part of an “ongoing outreach to get views and advice from both sides” on the SCOTUS nomination. The meeting was widely viewed as Trump rallying to win support from key Democrats so he can announce his SCOTUS pick and secure a confirmation before midterm elections in the fall.

READ IT AT THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

###

Read more: https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-trump-rushing-to-announce-supreme-court-pick-by-july-11

[madaboutharry]

1. There should be no doubt that his choice will be an affront

to all that is decent and good. Trump and those near him are reactionaries and they will choose a person who sees the world the same way.

It is going to be a terrible and emotional day for all who believe that The Constitution is a living document.

[workinclasszero]

14. No doubt about that at all

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Stolen Seat #2 will go to

someone to the right of Michael Cohen

total libertarian with ties to big business, tobacco, coal, fossil fuels, chemical industries

and a total evangelical

under age 45

we are so cooked

[Lonestarblue]

3. Reporters need to turn over every rock quickly.

We need to know every business dealing and every possible connection to Trump for every one of his potential nominations. Why did we not know of Anthony Kennedy’s conflict of interest in anything Trump related because of his son being his banker? For a Russia-connected bank at that. Kennedy should have recused himself on those cases. People assume that Supreme Court judges are fine, upstanding citizens. We’re finding that that’s not true.

[PeacefulPeavey]

17. here's the list

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/27/us/politics/trump-list-supreme-court-nominees.html

"President Trump said he intends to choose his next Supreme Court nominee from a list he began compiling during the 2016 presidential campaign.

“I think you see the kind of quality that we’re looking at when you look at that list,” Mr. Trump said Wednesday in the Oval Office.

He added, “So it will be somebody from that list.”"

[Bernardo de La Paz]

4. "apparently try to woo key Democrats". All Democratic Senators better stand firm. . . . nt

[theaocp]

8. They won't.

And they won't feel ANY fucking consequences from our side. They will get a free fucking pass, like they do EVERY FUCKING TIME. If you were given a consequence-free decision to suck up to 45, wouldn't you? At least this isn't an important decision.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. No Judicial confirmations in this last year of tRump's Presidency. . . . nt

[Bernardo de La Paz]

6. Cory Booker: People under investigation by FBI do not get to pick judges to judge themselves. . nt

Senator Cory Booker: "The president of the United States is a subject of an ongoing criminal investigation...that could end up before the Supreme Court," so any Trump SCOTUS nomination should be "delayed until the Mueller investigation is concluded."

[bucolic_frolic]

7. which implies

such an action is almost de facto pardoning of oneself

and since Supreme Court Justices can only be recused by themselves, nonetheless the argument can be made that both any new nominee as well as Gorsuch should recuse themselves in judging Trump because he appointed them!

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. +1. . . . nt

[SergeStorms]

10. ..."announce his pick before he departs for the NATO summit..."

Why even attend the NATO summit? He'll only attempt to do what he's done at every other "summit", and that's whatever is best for Russia. No one will want to sit with Little Donnie, and he'll be off in a corner - by himself - with that smug, pernicious look on his face.

To HELL with Trump and his SC choice. We can only hope Air Force One crashes en route to Brussels.

[haele]

11. Only faint silver lining is that Drumpf appointees would have to recuse themselves

When ruling on anything to deal with Drumpf.

As in, his or his businesses being charged in multiple Constitutional oversteps, claiming he can't be charged for federal crimes he committed while in office, etc...

Haele

[Scruffy1]

13. I don't think so.

The supreme court has no ethics rules that I know of.

[lagomorph777]

16. And Repukes on the court have no ethics that I know of.

so your observation seems correct.

[truthisfreedom]

12. Just imagine how that will cut into his golf routine.

[lagomorph777]

15. I thought he would wait until after meeting with his boss.

...before nominating Putin for SCOTUS.