Possible Scalia Replacements

[MarkCO]

Cruz is Hispanic. He is also incredibly intelligent. I think he would be the best fit. I just don't think Trump will put him in there.

Sadly, I agree...or he won't take it because he really wants to be POTUS and if the next 4 years go well, he might be POTUS46.

[Stats Shooter]

MarkCO
You don't think Cruz would accept a SCOTUS appt? I do, he deeply cares about upholding the Constitution. The legacy of the SCOTUS can be much bigger than anything a POTUS does. Also, it is a lifetime appt, not 4 or 8 yrs.
I'm not saying President Trump will nominate him. I was just saying I believe he would be a great choice for replacing scalia, and he would be a fool to turn it down if he is truly a strict constitutionalist .

[MarkCO]

I don't know what is in either man's head right now, but if I was either of them, I would swallow a bit of pride and get Cruz on the bench.

[zukiphile]

If the political capital to get Cruz onto the Sup Ct is spent, I don't want him dropping from a heart attack in 5 years.

The man is only in his mid 40s.

[carguychris]

Further upsides of nominating Cruz, with a bit more of a political focus:

• Assuming Cruz recuses himself, there is still a probable GOP majority in the Senate; the LA runoff will probably go Republican since GOP candidates won a larger share of votes than Democratic candidates, and even if a GOP senator defects, Pence casts the tiebreaking vote.
• A replacement senator from Texas is chosen in a special election, which is virtually guaranteed to be won by another Republican.
• Trump gets to throw a bone to socially conservative GOP voters whose support for him was lukewarm.

Excluding personal factors, IMHO it's a win-win for Republicans, Trump, and the cause of gun rights, but the critical question is whether animosity between the two men will overcome the political and policy arguments.

[MarkCO]

^Yep.

BUT, Cruz's religious views on Abortion have been publically stated and the left will do anything to keep a stated Pro-Life judge from being confirmed. I am not sure that there are not other choices with the same views, but less visibility on their views and less animosity.

[csmsss]

As much as I would adore seeing Cruz on the Supreme Court, in my opinion he's quite unlikely to be confirmed if nominated. Cruz is enormously unpopular with Democrats, of course, but he is also loathed by the Senate GOP leadership. It's quite possible his nomination wouldn't even make it past the Judiciary Committee.

[carguychris]

Originally Posted by csmsss

...Cruz [is] unlikely to be confirmed if nominated. Cruz is... loathed by the Senate GOP leadership.

Who would be happy to be rid of him, particularly considering that his reelection to the Senate is virtually guaranteed, and that he may run for POTUS again.

Moving him into the SCOTUS should stop him from shooting any more flaming rhetorical arrows directly at them. Cruz has a keen sense of tradition, and he will likely assume the judicial role of generally staying quiet and refraining from directly criticizing the legislature. (The SCOTUS obviously has a critical role in reviewing legislation, but direct attacks by SCOTUS justices on the people who passed the legislation are vanishingly rare.)

Removing Cruz from the Senate opens up the possibility that he'll be replaced by another mild-mannered and mainstream team player like John Cornyn.

Sounds like a win for the Senate leadership too.

[johnwilliamson062]

Someone, I believe jokingly, suggested Gura in another thread.
What a coup that would be, especially considering he is only 45.

[scpapa]

^^^^
I would rather have Gura winning lawsuits for us, than serving on the court. His replacement may not win arguments like Gura does.
Rick

[Coyote Blue]

Mike Lee of Utah, easily number one. Texan Ted Cruz, the second choice.

Thankfully happy we are able to have this discussion!

[Old Bill Dibble]

Someone, I believe jokingly, suggested Gura in another thread.
What a coup that would be, especially considering he is only 45.

That was me and I was kidding. Gura has zero political capital and no chance of getting nominated.

[natman]

That was me and I was kidding. Gura has zero political capital and no chance of getting nominated.

True. Besides, as already mentioned, he's doing a terrific job in the role he has now.

[psyfly]

Pardon a likely ignorant question.

My DoD computer will not let me open the link in the OP.

I have seen Mike Lee mentioned more than once.

Has President-Elect Trump already departed from his original list?

Mike Lee was not on that one.

Is he being mistaken for his brother Thomas, who was on the list?

Thanks,

W

[BarryLee]

Mike Lee was not on that one.

Is he being mistaken for his brother Thomas, who was on the list?

No, from what I understand both have been mentioned, however many believe the brother is the more likely pick between the two.

[Jim March]

Pryor has a problem. He's been blackmailed for over a decade by some Alabama gambling interests over naked gay dating pics he published in college in something called "Bad Puppy" magazine.

Not even remotely joking. My wife has seen the pics and knows who the blackmailers are.

Ixnay on Pryor.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Well, in addressing the Federalist Society, Trump insisted his SCOTUS pick would come from his short-list he has published. Washington Times is also reporting that Cruz is not a contender.

Trump has said his pick will be pro-life and pro-2A. He also said gay marriage was settled law in his view. So someone on his short list who ticks all those boxes might be a likely candidate; however he didn't promise any particular stance on gay marriage as he did on the other two issues, so it remains to be seen how important it is that a potential justice agrees it is settled law.

[HiBC]

I'm not a mod,I do not make the call.I suspect if the discussion veers off to non-2a positions,such as abortion and gay marriage,or a potential Judges positions on those issues,we will get shut down.

Without being specific,on one of those issues Cruz took a 10th Amendment response,no place does the Constitution address or give the Fed Govt the power to address the issue,it is not a SCOTUS issue.It is a State issue.

IMO,too often SCOTUS loses track of the 10th Amendment.I like to see that restraint in a Justice.

[Al Norris]

Originally Posted by HiBC

I'm not a mod, I do not make the call.

I am not only a moderator, but also the moderator that designed this specific sub forum and the rules it follows. I venture to say that my opinion (call) holds just a small amount of weight.

Originally Posted by HiBC

.I suspect if the discussion veers off to non-2a positions, such as abortion and gay marriage, or a potential Judges positions on those issues, we will get shut down.

Since this is the only place on the Firing Line, where we can discuss non-firearm topics, the thread will get shut down if it goes off-topic.

What is the topic? President-Elect Trumps possible candidates for the Supreme Court and the qualifications (positions) they may have. A judges position on things like abortion or gay marriage (both being purported civil rights) are exactly on topic for this thread.

[mumble]Seems I have to remind folks of this at least once a year.[/grumble]

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Scott Adams, who predicted Trump's success in both the primary and general way ahead of many pundits, wrote an interesting piece about how he perceives Trump: http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1531722...ak-an-illusion

If his supposition is right, then candidates from that list of 21 who can crack that narrative frame would seem to be especially likely - especially given the scrutiny that first nominee will face.

Of course, that's a lot of "ifs" too... The good news is I don't see any bad candidates on that list.

[Tom Servo]

One thing to remember is this: the first appointment won't do much for us. He's just filling the vacancy left by another conservative. The balance won't shift. For that, we need Ginsburg and/or Breyer to retire. Both are definite possibilities.

The other problem is one of influence. Scalia was hugely charismatic and experienced. I don't doubt that he's the one who swung Kennedy to our side in Heller and McDonald. A new Justice, no matter what his principles, won't have that same level of pull.

As such, I'd suggest not bringing sensitive cases on the 2A until we've replaced Scalia and at least one other Justice.

[Jim March]

I'm not worried about whether or not Pryor is gay, or experimented in college, or his current stance on gays.

I'm very concerned that he's been blackmailed by shady characters.

My main source is my wife. She used to be deep into Alabama GOP politics until turning on them in spectacular fashion ("60 Minutes", testimony before congress) regarding politically motivated false criminal prosecutions in 2006-2007. If anybody would know what was going on with Pryor's past, it'd be her. She knows who's blackmailing Pryor, how they got the pics, what the full set looks like and how Roger Shuler got a partial set - and why (pressure was being applied to Pryor by a partial release of the pics).

We don't want this guy.

[Old Bill Dibble]

Ginsberg was hinting on her 60 Minutes puff piece earlier this year that she might be not be ready to retire for a long while. So long as Trump is pres they will have to haul her out on a gurney before she will go.

Kennedy is getting old. He would be smart to retire soon.