Home >> Opinion >> Liberal Meltdown Over Kennedy Retiring

Liberal Meltdown Over Kennedy Retiring

election meldown

As soon as Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement, left-wing activists lost their minds and went into a total psychotic meltdown at the thought of Trump having to name another Supreme Court judge and those on the left are having major meltdowns. They just don’t know what to think. According to them, it was perfectly fine for the Democrats to control everything, but now that Republicans are in control, the world must surely be ending. They jumped to way-over the top conclusions criticizing the nominee before there even was a nominee. “They’re going to overturn Roe vs. Wade,” some anguished, “They’re going to do away with gay rights and women’s rights,” others said and still others said Trump was going to do away with abortions because this is all the left knows how to do. They believe in legislating from the bench and not abiding by the constitution. Republicans are selecting normal Judges who just enforce the laws not make them up as they go. The courts are not legislative bodies and are not supposed to create laws just interpret them. The Democrats have tried to usurp the power of the Constitution for over 100 years, using activist Judges to create law, rather than interpret the law.

I felt like telling everyone to, “Just calm down. You’re going to give yourselves a heart attack and won’t live to see who the nominee is.” They were all in a combination of anger and despair. This is nothing new for the left. They said the same thing when Reagan was president and the same thing when he nominated Kennedy and Kennedy was always fair and ruled by the constitution no matter whose side it was on. They said the same thing when Clarence Thomas was nominated and Robert Bork and more recently with Gorsuch and he has proven to be a constitutionalist also ruling fairly on both sides. This is what the people want on the court, someone who follows the constitution

Kennedy’s retirement represents a golden opportunity for President Trump to shape the court in favor of conservatives for decades.

(Article Continues Below Advertisement)

But Chuck Schumer made an announcement and it could come back to bite him.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is wasting no time attempting to derail President Trump’s Supreme Court nomination. Schumer said the Senate shouldn’t even bother to consider a Trump nomination this year.

Fox News Insider reports:

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) warned President Trump and Republicans against nominating a Supreme Court justice to replace Anthony Kennedy prior to the 2018 election, and demanded they reject any nominee who would seek to overturn Roe v. Wade.

(Article Continues Below Advertisement)

“[R]eproductive rights for women and countless other protections for middle-class Americans are at stake,” Schumer said.

He demanded that the Senate’s top Republican, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, abide by the so-called Biden Rule when deciding to commence proceedings to confirm a Supreme Court pick.

Senator Chuck Schumer is upset that he did not get his way in the final hours of the Obama Presidency to confirm Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.

Now, Chuck Schumer is attempting to prevent President Trump from confirming a new judge before the 2018 midterm election.

Schumer is missing the big difference between the 2016 and 2018 election.

Republicans chose to hold up Garland’s confirmation during a Presidential election so the voters and a new administration could choose who to place on the court.

This is a Congressional election year, not Presidential. Chuck Schumer has no ground to stand on. And his so-called “blue wave” is turning into little more than a trickle. Voters will surely punish Democrats for obstructing any qualified nominee.

This is why the upcoming midterm elections are one of the most important elections in our lifetime.

Trump has asked advisers their opinions about nominating Utah Senator Mike Lee to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court, according to three people familiar with the matter.

It remains early in the selection process for a nomination that will be a crucial part of Trump’s legacy, choosing a justice who is likely to serve on the court for decades and cement its ideological balance to the most conservative in generations.

Trump thinks Lee would be easily confirmed by the Senate, but the president has expressed concern about keeping his Senate seat in Republican hands, one person said.

Thank God American patriots elected a businessman-entrepreneur Donald J. Trump as POTUS, who is a man who wants to get things done, spends most of his time thinking how to MAGA, and step-by-step is accomplishing it.

Another constitutionalist-originalist is what we need, along with big wins in the Senate and House. If the Democrats get in their agenda will be:

  • Impeach President Trump
  • Keeping Obamcare
  • Rescind the tax cuts and raise your taxes
  • Open borders
  • Destroy Trump’s Supreme Court nominee

That’s why this next election is one of the most important elections in history.

Trump will have 25 choices to choose from. Here are the early favorites:

Judges Brett Kavanaugh of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Raymond Kethledge of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and Diane Sykes of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Both Kavanaugh and Kethledge clerked for Kennedy on the high court. Sources close to the president styled both men as front-runners for Trump’s next Supreme Court appointment just days after Justice Neil Gorsuch’s nomination was announced in January 2017.

Kavanaugh, 53, is a graduate of Yale Law School who worked in the George W. Bush White House prior to his appointment to the D.C. Circuit, often considered the Supreme Court’s farm team.

Kethledge, 51, was in private practice before his elevation to the federal bench in 2008. He is a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School. (RELATED: Kennedy Calls It Quits: Swing Justice Hands Trump The Biggest Gift Of His Presidency)

Sykes, 60, has served on the 7th Circuit since 2003. Before she was tapped for federal judicial service, she was a state judge in Wisconsin. Sykes was also seriously considered for the Supreme Court during the Bush presidency.

All three are renown judicial conservatives with substantial ties to the Federalist Society, which advises the president on judicial appointments.

Three recent Trump appointees to the federal circuit courts, Judges Amul Thapar and Joan Larsen of the 6th Circuit, and Amy Coney Barrett of the 7th Circuit are also in serious contention.

Thapar, 49, is a protege of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell with extensive experience as a federal trial judge. Larsen, 49, served briefly on the Michigan Supreme Court, clerked for the late Justice Antonin Scalia and taught law at the University of Michigan. Barrett, 45, is also a Scalia clerk and was a widely respected academic at the University of Notre Dame Law School when she was nominated for the 7th Circuit in 2017.

Barrett’s national profile increased significantly when Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee questioned her about the extent to which her deeply-held religious beliefs might bear on the discharge of her duties. Barrett is a Roman Catholic.

Speaking on the Senate floor Wednesday afternoon, McConnell said the Senate will aim to confirm a new justice before the November elections. Trump has since moved that date up to the end of July.

James Woods

Wake up Right! Subscribe to our Morning Briefing and get the news delivered to your inbox before breakfast!
0

About Jim Clayton

I am a retired former newspaper reporter and retail sales person. I'm a politically conservative easy going person from New Jersey. I am married to a wonderful wife and like talking and writing about movies,, concerts I attend and current events all which I write about here. I would enjoy hearing from anyone on my articles and they can write to me here.

One comment

  1. Jim, I have some concern about the word “interpret”. We want judges that adjudicate properly by determining the facts of any give case according to the words of the original Constitution – the Supreme LAW of the land. But it seems almost from the beginning justices have attempted to “adjudicate” the Constitution. I.e. Justice Marshall (1803) who appointed this power to himself and the Supreme Court to be the final word on what that document “means”. The Constitution seems vague and open to interpretation until one reads both the Preamble and the 9th and 10th Amendments. The document is about limiting powers of the central government from interfering with our individual freedom and rights.

    The courts are to apply the Law, not interpret it. Congress makes all laws. Zero laws are made by the president and Supreme Court – AND the Bureaucracies for that matter!! Those who think the Constitution is a living document want it to conforms to our day’s conditions. They believe the lie that human nature is different than it was 230 years ago. But human nature has not changed over the last 10,000 years and Truth has never changed in spite of perhaps 13 Billion years gone by. “Natural Superiors” who know, oh, so much more than us deplorable, stupid voters, think they can pull up the boundary stakes of these two facts and move them to wherever they want!

    The Truth frustrates those who are so self-centered that they try to make it “relative” (the actual attempt to battle against and destroy God – as discussed in Revelations) and those who seek big government are frustrated by the limits of the Constitution so that they attempt to make it “living” and therefore changeable. To both objectives they corrupt our language because they love darkness (confusion) where they can further their evil agenda!

Sign up for our Newsletter

* indicates required field




Email Format


Subscribe!