And then there were two for USSC

rwilson452 · January 30, 2017, 02:31 AM

I read on my FNC feed that it is down to two. Gorsuch and Hardiman,

Bartholomew Roberts · January 30, 2017, 09:15 AM

Both of those are solid picks with a past pro-Second Amendment view and who were confirmed to their appellate seats unanimously by a Democratic Senate, so it will be hard to now argue they are some kind of right-wing nutjobs.

Gorusch also is rated "unanimously well qualified" by the ABA. My only gripe with him is I think a SCOTUS comprised entirely of Harvard and Yale grads is completely out of touch with the rest of America. But that is a minor gripe, and its not like Hardiman, who is a Georgetown grad is going to dilute that monoculture much.

I think Gorusch will be easier to confirm; though of course all the past accolades by ABA and non-opposition by a Democratic Senate will be memory-holed if either candidate is nominated.

ETA: Hardiman wrote the dissent in this opinion where he argues that New Jerset's "justifiable need" requirement for a concealed carry permit violates even intermediate scrutiny (if that's too much legalese for you, suffice it to say that view would be a major shift in the right direction on the Second Amendment):
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-3rd-circuit/1640513.html

2ndsojourn · January 30, 2017, 10:08 AM

Thanks for the update BR.

"....confirmed to their appellate seats unanimously by a Democratic Senate, so it will be hard to now argue they are some kind of right-wing nutjobs."

Oh, they'll argue. Not that it'll do any good since they're outnumbered.

**Aguila Blanca** · January 30, 2017, 10:38 AM

Now if Mrs. Bader-Ginsberg will just have the courtesy to retire gracefully ...

vicGT · January 30, 2017, 11:09 AM

I think it's down to one. Trump tweeted that he has made his selection.

And Aguila Blanca, I hope her Honor retires both immediately and with such grace that Breyer is deeply moved, and retires with her

motorhead0922 · January 30, 2017, 12:14 PM

Of Hardiman, WaPo writes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Washington Post

But liberal groups oppose Hardiman as a Supreme Court choice, highlighting his opinions that have protected gun owners and limited the ability of citizens to hold police accountable. In Second Amendment cases, he has adopted a view more expansive than what the Supreme Court has so far endorsed.

I like the sound of that.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...=.b0de575cadab

On the other hand, Gorsuch is described on some web sites as very "Scalia-like". That sounds easier to get approved. I.e. put the court back the way it was.

Bartholomew Roberts, I looked at your link, but I am having trouble determining who wrote what parts of the opinion. Can you help me out?

Glenn E. Meyer · January 30, 2017, 12:34 PM

If a candidate is opposed because of a gun rights stand - that is a good thing.

I wonder if it would predict the candidate (annoyed at the opposition) would be even more proactive.

However, even with Thomas and a progun candidate, the other 'conservatives' haven't really risen to the challenge after the two decisions (Heller and McD).

Bartholomew Roberts · January 30, 2017, 01:13 PM

Yes, that link is awkwardly organized. The first paragraph after "VII" is the end of the majority opinion and the first paragraph before "I" is the beginning of the dissent Hardiman wrote.

There has been some speculation Hardiman is the actual nominee and Gorusch is a signal to Kennedy that if he steps down now, Gorusch (Kennedy's former clerk) will replace him. Not sure how valid that is.

Bartholomew Roberts · January 31, 2017, 09:35 PM

Gorsuch is the nominee.

Gary L. Griffiths · January 31, 2017, 10:07 PM

Seems like the kind of original constructionist that we need on the Court!

January 30, 2017, 02:31 AM	#1
rwilson452 Senior Member Join Date: June 10, 2004 Location: Tioga co. PA Posts: 2,647	And then there were two for USSC I read on my FNC feed that it is down to two. Gorsuch and Hardiman, __________________ USNRET '61-'81

January 30, 2017, 09:15 AM	#2
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Both of those are solid picks with a past pro-Second Amendment view and who were confirmed to their appellate seats unanimously by a Democratic Senate, so it will be hard to now argue they are some kind of right-wing nutjobs. Gorusch also is rated "unanimously well qualified" by the ABA. My only gripe with him is I think a SCOTUS comprised entirely of Harvard and Yale grads is completely out of touch with the rest of America. But that is a minor gripe, and its not like Hardiman, who is a Georgetown grad is going to dilute that monoculture much. I think Gorusch will be easier to confirm; though of course all the past accolades by ABA and non-opposition by a Democratic Senate will be memory-holed if either candidate is nominated. ETA: Hardiman wrote the dissent in this opinion where he argues that New Jerset's "justifiable need" requirement for a concealed carry permit violates even intermediate scrutiny (if that's too much legalese for you, suffice it to say that view would be a major shift in the right direction on the Second Amendment): http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-3rd-circuit/1640513.html Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; January 30, 2017 at 09:41 AM.

January 30, 2017, 12:34 PM	#7
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	If a candidate is opposed because of a gun rights stand - that is a good thing. I wonder if it would predict the candidate (annoyed at the opposition) would be even more proactive. However, even with Thomas and a progun candidate, the other 'conservatives' haven't really risen to the challenge after the two decisions (Heller and McD). __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

January 31, 2017, 10:07 PM	#10
Gary L. Griffiths Senior Member Join Date: April 7, 2000 Location: AZ, WA Posts: 1,466	Seems like the kind of original constructionist that we need on the Court! __________________ Violence is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and valorous feeling which believes that nothing is worth violence is much worse. Those who have nothing for which they are willing to fight; nothing they care about more than their own craven apathy; are miserable creatures who have no chance of being free, unless made and kept so by the valor of those better than themselves. Gary L. Griffiths (Paraphrasing John Stuart Mill)

January 30, 2017, 10:08 AM	#3
2ndsojourn Senior Member Join Date: January 15, 2013 Location: South Jersey Posts: 1,416	Thanks for the update BR. "....confirmed to their appellate seats unanimously by a Democratic Senate, so it will be hard to now argue they are some kind of right-wing nutjobs." Oh, they'll argue. Not that it'll do any good since they're outnumbered.

January 30, 2017, 10:38 AM	#4
Aguila Blanca Staff Join Date: September 25, 2008 Location: CONUS Posts: 18,459	Now if Mrs. Bader-Ginsberg will just have the courtesy to retire gracefully ...

January 30, 2017, 11:09 AM	#5
vicGT Member Join Date: January 15, 2017 Posts: 31	I think it's down to one. Trump tweeted that he has made his selection. And Aguila Blanca, I hope her Honor retires both immediately and with such grace that Breyer is deeply moved, and retires with her

January 30, 2017, 01:13 PM	#8
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Yes, that link is awkwardly organized. The first paragraph after "VII" is the end of the majority opinion and the first paragraph before "I" is the beginning of the dissent Hardiman wrote. There has been some speculation Hardiman is the actual nominee and Gorusch is a signal to Kennedy that if he steps down now, Gorusch (Kennedy's former clerk) will replace him. Not sure how valid that is.

January 31, 2017, 09:35 PM	#9
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Gorsuch is the nominee.