•   
  •   
  •   

Opinion What Kind of Supreme Court Will We Have Now?

18:12  11 july  2018
18:12  11 july  2018 Source:   nationalreview.com

Two judges seen as leading contenders for Supreme Court

  Two judges seen as leading contenders for Supreme Court D.C. Circuit Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Chicago Circuit Court Judge Amy Coney Barrett and others may meet with the president this weekLoad Error

Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh arrives prior to meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Capitol Hill, July 10, 2018 (Joshua Now , it’s possible that Kavanaugh has hidden his light under a bushel, because he’s an appellate court judge bound by precedent.

And on reflection, now that the court has agreed to hear those two appeals plus a third, I’m glad I was wrong. With the court in the full glare of an election-year spotlight, we will learn beyond any doubt what kind of Supreme Court we have — and whether its evolution into partnership with a president

Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh arrives prior to meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Capitol Hill, July 10, 2018© Joshua Roberts/Reuters Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh arrives prior to meeting with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell on Capitol Hill, July 10, 2018

Editor’s note: The opinions in this article are the author’s, as published by our content partner, and do not necessarily represent the views of MSN or Microsoft.

Amid the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the political Left and the triumphalist trumpeting from the political Right regarding the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, one question has gone missing: What, exactly, will the Supreme Court look like once Kavanaugh joins?

Orrin Hatch may have given a clue about Trump's Supreme Court pick

  Orrin Hatch may have given a clue about Trump's Supreme Court pick Sen. Orrin Hatch may have given a hint to who President Trump’s next Supreme Court nominee may be, after repeatedly using a female pronoun in an op-ed.Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, may have given a hint to who President Trump’s next Supreme Court nominee may be, after repeatedly using a female pronoun in an op-ed on the pick.

The US Supreme Court is an Article III (constitutional) court , and the highest appellate court for federal question jurisdiction, or cases involving issues related to the US Constitution The Supreme Court also has exclusive original jurisdiction (is the only trial court ) for disputes between the states.

In my view, with the future of the Supreme Court now at stake, and the election for our next president already well underway, it is the People who should determine what kind of Supreme Court they wish to have . The president is entitled, of course, to discharge his own constitutional authority to nominate.

Those on the left, like those on the right, suggest that Kavanaugh will be a transformational pick. They believe Roe is in danger, that Citizens United will be dramatically strengthened, that religious believers will be handed carte blanche, and all the rest.

Here’s the truth: If there’s one proposition that distinguishes Kavanaugh from his more militant colleagues, it’s his unique capacity to write specific, detailed decisions that knock down trees while leaving forests intact. Kavanaugh’s opinions tend not to be ringing endorsements or rebukes of the Justice Scalia or Justice Thomas type; they tend to be narrowly tailored decisions that recall Chief Justices Roberts and Rehnquist.

Now, it’s possible that Kavanaugh has hidden his light under a bushel, because he’s an appellate court judge bound by precedent. It seems more likely that he’s a fan of Roberts-type judicial restraint, which means pruning back law he sees as violating the Constitution rather than decimating it and salting the earth.

Trump nears decision on replacement for Supreme Court

  Trump nears decision on replacement for Supreme Court President Donald Trump is nearing a decision on a replacement for retiring Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy after a weekend of deliberation at his New Jersey golf club. A person with knowledge of the president's thinking said Sunday that Trump has not yet communicated a final choice. The person, who was not authorized to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, said Trump has spent the weekend discussing his options with allies amid frenzied last-minute lobbying. Trump will announce his pick Monday night.

Demonstrators at the Supreme Court on Sunday. The court will hear arguments on Tuesday about the status of the Deferred Action for Childhood Yeah, he kind of is right, because when people in these positions are not personally loyal to him, personally beholden to the president, and when they

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court struck down a 1992 federal law on Monday that effectively banned Both were challenged in court . But now the Legislature only has to pass a law establishing the rules In addition, an entire industry has been created anticipating this kind of sweeping change.

Take, for example, Roe v. Wade. Conservatives have high hopes that Kavanaugh — along with Roberts, Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas — will rule to knock over that legal monstrosity. That’s highly unlikely. First off, it takes four votes for the Supreme Court to agree to review a particular lower-court case, and it’s unlikely that Roberts and Kavanaugh will agree to review a straight-up challenge to Roe.

It’s far more likely that we’ll see Roberts and Kavanaugh review cases that pare away at Roe via the “undue burden” standard articulated in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) — a case in which the Court held that abortion laws were tenable unless they presented an “undue burden” for a woman seeking an abortion. In Gonzalez v. Carhart (2007), for example, Justice Kennedy decided for the Court that the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act was constitutional, because women could get abortions prior to late-stage pregnancy, and the law therefore didn’t constitute an undue burden. We could see that logic extended incrementally over time, leaving Roe in place but carving out chunks of it.

Santorum on Kavanaugh: Trump bowed to Washington elite

  Santorum on Kavanaugh: Trump bowed to Washington elite Rick Santorum said Monday that President Donald Trump "bowed to the elite in Washington" by picking Judge Brett Kavanaugh as his Supreme Court nominee. "Well, I think that Donald Trump said he was going to energize the base with this pick. I don't think he did that," the Republican former Pennsylvania senator and CNN political commentator told Chris Cuomo on CNN's "Cuomo PrimeTime." Kavanaugh has been dubbed a Washington insider, having worked in both Bush administrations, and is currently a judge on the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit.

Now that Judge John Roberts is about to become the next Chief Justice, pundits have been scratching their heads about what kind of Chief he will be, over the Truth be told, there are few reliable guides to the eventual views of Supreme Court nominees, and some of those that do exist are not generally

What happens when the Supreme Court becomes significantly more conservative than the public? Assuming Kavanaugh votes as his record suggests, the court will move to the right on several In the meantime, calls for court -packing could become a clamor, or some other kind of end run around the

That sort of incrementalism is less likely to whip up anger against the Court — a major concern for Roberts, at least. But it’s also more likely to leave unborn children vulnerable over time, and it leaves open the possibility that if the Court moves back to the Left, the “undue burden” loophole will be closed.

For another example, see the Court’s recent decision in the Masterpiece Cakeshop case. There, the Court ruled 7–2 that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission had violated the rights of a religious baker by mandating that he design and bake a cake for a same-sex wedding. But the case wasn’t decided on grounds of basic religious liberty, but on grounds of open discrimination by the Civil Rights Commission against the religious baker. Concurring justices openly acknowledged the possibility that the government could force religious bakers to bake the cake so long as the officials weren’t too nasty about targeting religious people. Incrementalism protected that particular religious baker, but not others.

Narrow decisions are less controversial and can be transformational over time. But it seems that the Left is always ready to issue blanket rights and wholesale rewritings of the Constitution even as the Right sweats and strains to avoid interpreting the Constitution as written — all for the sake of stability and incrementalism.

That doesn’t mean Kavanaugh is bad. He’ll probably rule correctly on a consistent basis. But it does mean that those waiting for the ground to shift when it comes to major decisions from the Court might be waiting in vain. Instead, we’ll probably see a gradual shift from the Court over time that leaves more room for legislatures but doesn’t implode the unconstitutional foundations of the Left’s favorite legal bulwarks.

High court overturns first-degree murder conviction .
The highest court in Massachusetts has overturned the murder conviction of a Maine man who was found guilty in connection with a 1994 disappearance and death. The Supreme Judicial Court on Friday vacated the first-degree murder conviction of John Fredette because it "was predicated on a theory of aggravated kidnapping that did not exist at the time of the homicide."The case was sent back to the trial judge for either a finding of second-degree murder or a new trial.Fredette, of Saco, Maine, was one of three men convicted in 2014 in the killing of Kevin Harkins.

—   Share news in the SOC. Networks

Topical videos:

usr: 1
This is interesting!