Supreme Court: Trump nominates Neil Gorsuch


#1

Originally published at: http://boingboing.net/2017/01/31/supreme-court-trump-nominates.html


#2

FUCK those fucking Republican fucks.


#3

Yep. NSS.


#4

So, folks - what are you gonna say to the next person who admits they don’t vote?


#5

Garland was an equitable pick. This is just Nyeah-nyeah, we won, clown-car Debbie Deep Throat. Ugh.

When Rome burns, I intend to feast upon Senator liver…

insert sound Anthony Hopkins makes in Silence of the Lambs


#6

The Democrats must treat this nominee just as the Republicans treated Merrick Garland------>boi bye


#7

‘And the authoritarians of this country would prefer that you didn’t’.

Other responses, some dismissive, some generative:

  • ‘Try selling it on eBay next time.’
  • ‘I agree. Last time I voted, I felt terrible the next day.’
  • ‘Your representatives would prefer that you leave a voicemail anyway.’
  • ‘Can I join your anarcho-communist collective?’ (Note: This needn’t be sarcasm.)

#8

I’m beginning to think America, the ideal, is won or lost in the next four years…


#9

Well, he isn’t ridiculously unqualified for the position. I wonder what went wrong.


#10

They can (and should) bork him. Currently SCOTUS still needs 60 senators to be approved.

But the GOP could remove that, like the Dems did when the GOP were obstructing previously, and insert him on a straight majority, causing even more damage to the idea of governing by consensus.

I mean, ideally, if Gorsuch was rejected, Trump would look for a consensus candidate that could get 60 votes (like, I dunno, Garland - like the GOP suggested Obama should, right until he did), but politics is broken in this country so that won’t happen.

Gorsuch doesn’t sound like a completely unqualified candidate, just a very conservative one. And he’s replacing Scalia, who he seems to be much like, so it would be as-you-were on the court. Except that if one of the liberal or moderate judges died or retired, you know that another Scalia-alike will be added (e.g. Sykes, Hardiman, Pryor). And then we’ll really be screwed for another generation or two.


#11

Sen. Merkley (OR) has said he won’t vote on any Trump SCOTUS nominee.

I called my (Dem) Senators and encouraged them to do the same.


#12

He and Pence are going to have to wear signs around their necks so I can tell them apart.


#13

I did half-expect him to nominate someone with no experience in law who had previously sworn a Blood Oath to abolish the Supreme Court forever.


#14

As Kennedy’s former clerk, they’re hoping he can swing the swing vote- and maybe convince him that retiring won’t break the court with far right full mooner appointees.

Then they’ll break the court with far right full mooner appointees. Judge Roy Moore types.


#15

Okay, America, now is the time to dissent. Stand your fat-ass up and protest. Do it now, or lose America forever…

The Bill of Rights stands next to my front door.

The Constitution resides in my pocket.

My pants are worn, but I can still walk, I can still walk/roll for America. For what it means.

Put your politics aside, America abides.

Stand up for rights or lose them forever…I won’t go into this good night without a fundamental fight for American values…We are one.

E pluribus unum.


#16

Indeed, I was predicting a Harriet Miers candidate as a genuine middle finger, but this one ticks all the boxes.


#17

Trump unsurprisingly wants the filibuster eliminated, but McConnell seems pretty reluctant to go there. This is from The Hill:

Under other circumstances, this might be an opportunity to set the precedent of nominating centrist judges so that the fate of the country isn’t hanging on every single vacancy, but Mr. Art of the Deal doesn’t appear to be capable of compromise.


#18

I don’t think it’s going to take more than one year. Not at this rate.


#19

Tried that last year.


#20

The Dems have nothing to lose by opposing, and they could have something to gain. Oppose or not, this dink will probably be on the SCOTUS. Oppose, and at least you can say it was over your objections.