Trump Was Always Going to Pick the Wrong Judge

Updated on July 11, 2018
Source

President Trump's placement of a second Justice to the Supreme Court will shift the balance of our court system and have wide ranging consequences on the laws of our nation for years to come. His pick, Brett Kavanaugh, a Bush appointee and former clerk for retiring Justice Kennedy, was certainly not a nightmare pick for either sides of the isle. Nevertheless, Kavanaugh's nomination has drawn considerable reaction from members of Congress and the media, some panicking, some jubilant, and others unsure of exactly how they feel. Before we delve into the specifics on the nominee, his history and potential decision making on the Supreme Court, lets take a look at the reactions of those who will be voting on his confirmation in the Senate.

Source

Hypocrisy on both sides

Mitch McConnell, and his fellow Republican's in the Senate, blocked Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court for 293 days in 2016. While clearly a political move to prevent an idealogical shift to the left in the Court, McConnell explained his decision by saying he did not believe a new Justice should be nominated by a President leaving office in an election year. He took a risk, hoping the next President would be a Republican who would nominate a conservative to the court. Against all odds he got his wish with Trump and Justice Neil Gorsuch. Now, Democrats are trying call McConnell a hypocrite for going full speed ahead with Trump's nominee Kavanaugh. While his blocking of Garland is regrettable, it is hard to imagine Democrats in control of the Senate would not do the exact same. In fact, even before Trump's pick was announced, protests and a Democratic Party media blitz was already underway.

In the advertisement above, the Democratic National Committee refers to Kavanaugh as an "extremist who would have the power to overturn Roe v. Wade and gut the Affordable Care Act". The truth is the Democratic party was going to label anyone Trump selected as an extremist who poised a threat to landmark Supreme Court decisions such as Roe v. Wade, Obergefell v. Hodges (gay marriage), and National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (Obamacare). In reality, Brett Kavanaugh is a Kennedy acolyte who has publicly stated he would follow precedent in deciding cases presented to the Court. In addition, this is simply not how the Supreme Court operates. In order for a case to be overturned, a new case has to be brought before the Court that's outcome could potentially overrule a previous case. This process usually takes years, and a vast majority of cases are not heard by the Supreme Court and instead left to lower appellate courts. The fight for the Democratic Party now is to simply prevent any Trump nominee's confirmation by running a media campaign claiming reproductive rights, health care, and the LGBTQ community are all at risk. Many moderate Republican's acknowledged a nomination of a judge who publicly declared their opposition to abortion or LGBTQ rights as disastrous. Luckily for them, and the millions of socially progressive citizens in this country, Brett Kavanaugh is not that nominee. These ad campaigns were already formulated and paid for by anti-Trump PAC's and organizations, they simply needed a name to fill in. With a Quinnipiac University poll from July 9th finding 63 percent of American voters support Roe v. Wade, expect any notion of its reversal to met with fierce backlash. And with President Trump's approval rating hovering around 40 percent almost midway through his term, the last thing he needs is a new Supreme Court overturning landmark cases supported by a majority of Americans. If they do? Say hello to a blue wave, and say goodbye to Donald Trump in 2020.

Did Trump make the right pick in Brett Kavanaugh?

See results

Comments

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      5 days ago from Orange County California

      Sanxuary

      Do you even live in this country?

    • profile image

      Sanxuary 

      6 days ago

      Its pretty amazing that he picked the sure fight. Then again look at all his other great choices.

    • bradmasterOCcal profile image

      bradmasterOCcal 

      6 days ago from Orange County California

      Thomas

      You have not made your position on this article clearly stated. I don't know what to make of the conclusion you make.

      "And with President Trump's approval rating hovering around 40 percent almost midway through his term, the last thing he needs is a new Supreme Court overturning landmark cases supported by a majority of Americans. If they do? Say hello to a blue wave, and say goodbye to Donald Trump in 2020."

      B:

      A single issue is going to create a blue wave. How did you come up with that conclusion.

      The Roe v Wade Case from 1973 has been the source of presidential election controversy, and too date it stills remains. But even in the last election, it once again became an issue.

      This alone says that it cannot be a destructive issue and a prelude to the imaginary blue wave. First, don't believe polls, as the entire poll system crashed when Trump beat every poll by winning the electoral college vote.

      Second, the democrats have done nothing to warrant their wish of a blue wave. It is the left and the media that flies this blue balloon of political methane. The question the voters are pondering is what does the democrat party stand for, and what will voting for them in 2018 or 2020 will accomplish for the country and the people. The democrats have shown by action that they no longer represent America or Americans, and they have spent all their congressional votes on illegal aliens.

      Roe v Wade

      Repeated challenges since 1973 narrowed the scope of Roe v. Wade but did not overturn it. In Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey (1992), the Supreme Court established that restrictions on abortion are unconstitutional if they place an “undue burden” on a woman seeking an abortion before the fetus is viable. In Gonzales v. Carhart (2007), the court upheld the federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (2003), which prohibited a rarely used abortion procedure known as intact dilation and evacuation. In Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016), the court invoked its decision in Casey to strike down two provisions of a Texas law that had required abortion clinics to meet the standards of ambulatory surgical centres and abortion doctors to have admitting privileges at a nearby hospital."

      B:

      What this shows is that Roe v Wade has not answered the true question about abortion. In the Casey case, they use the phrase before the fetus is viable. The flaw in Roe v Wade is that the court never made judicial notice of when the fetus is viable, thus allowing abortions during the entire term.

      So modifying Roe v Wade is definitely in the best interest of the people.

      "Roe v. Wade, legal case in which the U.S. Supreme Court on January 22, 1973, ruled (7–2) that unduly restrictive state regulation of abortion is unconstitutional. In a majority opinion written by Justice Harry A. Blackmun, the court held that a set of Texas statutes criminalizing abortion in most instances violated a woman’s constitutional right of privacy, which it found to be implicit in the liberty guarantee of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (“…nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law”)."

      B:

      Seriously, what does this case have anything to do with the Right of Privacy?

      Also the liberty guarantee of due process. It took two people to conceive and yet it can unilaterally be undone by just one, the mother. Where is the father's liberty or his equal protection. And why do taxpayers have to pay for the abortions in any form.

      If the SCOTUS in the future defines the point where the fetus is viable then Roe v Wade can be modified. The rule would be simple, after the fetus is viable, then abortion is limited to emergencies.

      Also, the court failed to see the root cause of the problem of abortion which is why there is or is not a need for it. It shouldn't be used as the oops remedy. This is especially true in cases where a women has abortions multiple times.

      I personally think that many of these abortion saved society from creating some bad people. But, I don't have that authority to make these decisions. Even limiting the abortions to the first trimester would be an improvement. Abortion past that time would be scrutinized by the state more so than under Roe v Wade. Because that case did say that the state's interest become more in the second and third trimester.

      In conclusion on Roe v Wade, no big deal either way.

      "Many moderate Republican's acknowledged a nomination of a judge who publicly declared their opposition to abortion or LGBTQ rights as disastrous. Luckily for them, and the millions of socially progressive citizens in this country, Brett Kavanaugh is not that nominee.

      ---------------------

      "Many moderate Republican's acknowledged a nomination of a judge who publicly declared their opposition to abortion or LGBTQ rights as disastrous. Luckily for them, and the millions of socially progressive citizens in this country, Brett Kavanaugh is not that nominee. "

      B:

      You end with a non issue for Kavanaugh, so no problem for Trump.

      LGBT rights, what are they? Then they add a "Q" to it. How many more letters of the alphabet can they add and still call it a group. Can you tell me how L G B T and Q comprise a group. What is their common denominator.

      I take people one at a time, I don't like every person even if they are in a group that I like. I don't believe that the government should use its powers trying to force everyone to like everyone.

      For example, does everyone like all the Jewish people in America. NO! Did the Congress make laws, and the SCOTUS uphold those laws that would make Jews a protected class. No they didn't give them any special distinction.

      Yet, the US Government came down on the Mormons for changing the definition of marriage, while supporting the change in the definition of marriage for gays. These both can't be true? yet that is the decision, a bad one.

      You don't mean moderate republicans, you mean Rinos.

      You think the socially progressive is a good thing, why?

      ---------------------------

    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, soapboxie.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://soapboxie.com/privacy-policy#gdpr

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
    Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)