Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Supreme Court appointments have never not been political.
I’m not sure any president has appointed any justice without regard to ideally. Garland was Obama’s attempt to put someone right enough to the spectrum that Mitch would bite.
All of the “liberal” justices were appointed by democrats. All the conservative justices by republicans. These positions have always been political appointees. The hope is that given it is very difficult to impeach a Justice that they are not bound by the idealogical that got them to the bench and are free to make wise decisions on the basis of their interpretation of law.
The idea of impartiality is a fairytale. The best you can hope for is that they apply the law consistently within their philosophy so the textualists are always textualists and the contextualists are contextualists even if it doesn’t suit them.
So how is the packing of the Supreme Court with Justice aligning to their view Monstrous
|
Great post. All of the bloviating from the left on this one is simply that they want their political judge in instead of the GOPs political judge. They can't really say that, of course, so they need to come up with a palatable message to rally the believers - and that message is "hypocrisy". It's a valid message to give, just not a very compelling one.