SCOTUS-Watch: It's Gorsuch!

[The Other Castro]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://apnews.com/f96c27b46d3647988ecc8d8c35d5918a

[100% pro-life no matter what]

It's pretty clear that it is going to be either Sykes or Pryor.  If I had to guess, he will go with Pryor.

[The_Doctor]

Prediction: bland right winger becomes nominee. I'm betting Diane Sykes.

[Pandaguineapig]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

[100% pro-life no matter what]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

[Pandaguineapig]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I guess she has no pro-choice record but her case history has very little to no abortion rulings meaning that we have no history to base her position off of. This is how conservatives got screwed on Souter

[Person Man]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I guess she has no pro-choice record but her case history has very little to no abortion rulings meaning that we have no history to base her position off of. This is how conservatives got screwed on Souter

I think this time will be inconsequential but if it is someone who is Souter-like, then you can forget about abortion being illegal. The next time, we will know whether Trump wants to make the next election a referendum on abortion.

[KingSweden]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I guess she has no pro-choice record but her case history has very little to no abortion rulings meaning that we have no history to base her position off of. This is how conservatives got screwed on Souter

Based on what I know of her I imagine she's pretty pro life

Of all his short list I still think Gorsuch is the best choice, at least on non-abortion issues. He had a writing that spoke to me about how over-legislating is a negative

[Pandaguineapig]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I guess she has no pro-choice record but her case history has very little to no abortion rulings meaning that we have no history to base her position off of. This is how conservatives got screwed on Souter

Based on what I know of her I imagine she's pretty pro life

Of all his short list I still think Gorsuch is the best choice, at least on non-abortion issues. He had a writing that spoke to me about how over-legislating is a negative

Yeah, I think she would be the top pick if Ginsberg dies. I still think Pryor gets Scalia's seat because his pick would maintain the status-quo on the court and he has a better chance of not getting filibustered now than if he were nominated for Ginsberg's or Kennedy's seat

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Wasn't Pryor in a gay porn magazine or was that a different "Family Values Conservative?"

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

I guess she has no pro-choice record but her case history has very little to no abortion rulings meaning that we have no history to base her position off of. This is how conservatives got screwed on Souter

Based on what I know of her I imagine she's pretty pro life

Of all his short list I still think Gorsuch is the best choice, at least on non-abortion issues. He had a writing that spoke to me about how over-legislating is a negative

Yeah, I think she would be the top pick if Ginsberg dies. I still think Pryor gets Scalia's seat because his pick would maintain the status-quo on the court and he has a better chance of not getting filibustered now than if he were nominated for Ginsberg's or Kennedy's seat

Anyone the Mayor of Oompa-Loompa land nominates for any SC seat is going to get filibustered.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Schumer had better have a filibuster ready.

[7,052,770]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

Really? You can't think of any times where Trump was inconsistent and/or blatantly contradictory in his statements?

[The Other Castro]

Schumer had better have a filibuster ready.

Then say goodbye to the filibuster for SCOTUS appointments.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Being a white guy from Alabama should immediately disqualify anyone from having authority over federal law.  Let's not make the same mistake twice.

inb4 "this is why you guys lost blah blah blah," I never cared about offending people in the past nor do I intend to start

[DrScholl]

Wasn't Pryor in a gay porn magazine or was that a different "Family Values Conservative?"

There is a picture floating around out there that is supposed to be of him.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Schumer had better have a filibuster ready.

Then say goodbye to the filibuster for SCOTUS appointments.

Schumer should make them do it.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Schumer had better have a filibuster ready.

Then say goodbye to the filibuster for SCOTUS appointments.

Fair enough, it's bound to happen sooner or later. Still worth a try.

[Person Man]

Schumer had better have a filibuster ready.

Then say goodbye to the filibuster for SCOTUS appointments.

Fair enough, it's bound to happen sooner or later. Still worth a try.

Yeah. If the filibuster is gone, guess what happens when we take the country back? And if they stacked the courts by tgen, we'll pack 'em.

[Higgs]

Pryor.

[Reaganfan]

Skyes would be good, but Pryor is younger. Theoretically he could be on the court for 40 years.

[FairBol]

OK, I did NOT need to see that.  :: blinded for life :: 

[ProgressiveCanadian]

Pryor probably because many conservatives would like to appointed an unabashed pro-life justice to the court and Sykes while conservative is ambiguous on the issue

What has Sykes said to make us doubt her on abortion?  Trump has already promised that the nominee will be 100% pro-life, and I have no reason to doubt him.

Trusting Trump was your first mistake.

[Andrew]

We've already established that the president doesn't get to fill Supreme Court vacancies for his entire term.  Shouldn't we just wait until the next president takes office to fill this one?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

We've already established that the president doesn't get to fill Supreme Court vacancies for his entire term.  Shouldn't we just wait until the next president takes office to fill this one?

Indeed, the people deserve a chance to have their voice heard in 2020 before any nominee is given a vote.  Qualifications are completely irrelevant, this is – as the Republicans liked to say last year – a matter of respecting the will of the people and they have not yet had chance to have their say regarding how that seat gets filled.  Hillary won the popular vote, so clearly America wants a Democratic President to fill the vacancy.  Maybe they'll change their minds in 2020, but the seat should obviously remain vacant until a President who won the popular vote has been sworn-in.

[Beet]

We've already established that the president doesn't get to fill Supreme Court vacancies for his entire term.  Shouldn't we just wait until the next president takes office to fill this one?

Indeed, the people deserve a chance to have their voice heard in 2020 before any nominee is given a vote.  Qualifications are completely irrelevant, this is – as the Republicans liked to say last year – a matter of respecting the will of the people and they have not yet had chance to have their say regarding how that seat gets filled.  Hillary won the popular vote, so clearly America wants a Democratic President to fill the vacancy.  Maybe they'll change their minds in 2020, but the seat should obviously remain vacant until a President who won the popular vote has been sworn-in.

Precisely. In 2012, the voters had the chance to pick who they wanted to fill vacancies in the next four years... they picked a D. In 2016, voters had the chance again, they picked a D again.