How is the Supreme Court confirmation going to go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:51%
Wow

This is like how trump celebrates 51% approval.

The highest mark he’s ever seen, much high than his usual low 40s. Sad.

I know right? And yet he’s still YOUR president 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣

For ten more weeks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like her.

Yep. Me too. She’ll be a good addition to the court.

An associate professor with 3 years in the bench? Sure, she’s *exceptional.*

Did you know that CHIEF JUSTICE Roberts had even less than three years on the bench? Did you know that Justice Kagan had NO prior judicial experience? Now you do.

John Roberts was a highly accomplished lawyer who argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court. Kagan was Solicitor General.

This is absolutely no comparison between Roberts and Kagan, on one hand, and Amy, on the other. She is mediocrity at its finest. Shameful.

An associate professor whose publications have had virtually no impact in the field. No litigation experience, only 3 years on the bench. She is the least qualified nominee in modern history.

Actually, I think Harriet Miers might have been...but GWB (rightly) pulled her nomination.

Yes, that was a stupid nomination but good that he saw sense and pulled it. Dems were not smart about this one. Instead of focusing on ideology, which was a losing proposition, they absolutely should have hammered again and again that Barrett does not have adequate credentials.

DP. Kind of tough to do when she received a well qualified from the ABA, no? Clerkships, prívate practice, distinguished career as a professor, appellate court judge. I’m not understanding your argument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I like her.

Yep. Me too. She’ll be a good addition to the court.

An associate professor with 3 years in the bench? Sure, she’s *exceptional.*

Did you know that CHIEF JUSTICE Roberts had even less than three years on the bench? Did you know that Justice Kagan had NO prior judicial experience? Now you do.

John Roberts was a highly accomplished lawyer who argued 39 cases before the Supreme Court. Kagan was Solicitor General.

This is absolutely no comparison between Roberts and Kagan, on one hand, and Amy, on the other. She is mediocrity at its finest. Shameful.

An associate professor whose publications have had virtually no impact in the field. No litigation experience, only 3 years on the bench. She is the least qualified nominee in modern history.

I thought she was a full professor with a research chair who had won distinguished teaching awards.

[Anonymous]

184 pages of Q's with a handful of A's

This is really pathetic, and frankly, if the GOP installs her on the court, then judicial reform will be fully warranted.

[Anonymous]

More than 200 of her ND colleagues oppose her confirmation:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PG9NWuVnkTn9tbdsPiO4TOqSpUvDQ_YH/view

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:51%
Wow

This is like how trump celebrates 51% approval.

The highest mark he’s ever seen, much high than his usual low 40s. Sad.

I know right? And yet he’s still YOUR president 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣

Not for much longer!

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Between Kavanaugh's perjury and this, there is reason to impeach two sitting Supreme Court Justices and possible with enough support to have them removed. Is this the sword the GOP wants to die on?

Don't rush these people through and make sure their pasts are fully disclosed to the American public.

[Anonymous]

The National Catholic Reporter says Barrett should be rejected owing to her extreme moral relativism.

https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/editorial-barretts-moral-relativism-cause-rejection-bench

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The National Catholic Reporter says Barrett should be rejected owing to her extreme moral relativism.

https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/editorial-barretts-moral-relativism-cause-rejection-bench

I think she thinks her Catholicism is above that typically practiced by most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Between Kavanaugh's perjury and this, there is reason to impeach two sitting Supreme Court Justices and possible with enough support to have them removed. Is this the sword the GOP wants to die on?

Don't rush these people through and make sure their pasts are fully disclosed to the American public.

It worked for them last time, so I’m sure they’re fine with the risk again.

[Anonymous]

When the controlling party breaks its own rules, then the nominee is illegitimate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When the controlling party breaks its own rules, then the nominee is illegitimate

All of this is illegitimate. Like Trump’s big empty book of healthcare, there’s no there there in Miss Amy’s brain. There’s nothing except fealty to the Christian fascist regime she hopes to help establish.

[Anonymous]

Who is going to tell Lindsay?

no words

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When the controlling party breaks its own rules, then the nominee is illegitimate

All of this is illegitimate. Like Trump’s big empty book of healthcare, there’s no there there in Miss Amy’s brain. There’s nothing except fealty to the Christian fascist regime she hopes to help establish.

Wrong. Committees have discretion over their own rules as long as their actions do not conflict with Senate rules. Besides Committee business has been transacted without minority members present in the past. Also, you should apologize for your bigoted statement regarding her faith.