|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Oct 22, 2020 13:38:32 GMT -5
The ABA derives a lot of its power as a professional organization from people having confidence in it as a serious arbiter of professional standards. When it gets this obviously political, no one is going to pay attention to it any longer. Lawyers who want to advance their careers will no longer pay dues to it.
Mizelle has packed more into her career than 98% of the US Bar will ever achieve in their lifetimes. This is a district and not circuit or SC nomination.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 13:55:17 GMT -5
You mean in lieu of actual trial experience she has kissed the right kind of butt. Once again you failed to answer the question before you which is what makes you more qualified than the ABA to evaluate her qualifications?
Nobody wins when there aren't standards in place that both sides need to meet, and it's not political to say she clearly hasn't met them. It's factual.
Since January 20, 1989, 21 nominees were rated “not qualified." 21... That's less than 1 a year. The problem is whenever you don't get what you want, you want to change the rules. These are lifetime appointments and standards should be applied fairly across the board.
The one side dismissing those standards in order to receive their preferred outcomes is the entity that's making it political, not the people who are applying clear and transparent standards to all applicants regardless of their political leanings.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Oct 22, 2020 14:35:30 GMT -5
She has more federal experience than Sandra Day O'Connor had before she went to the SC and as much trial experience as Robert Kennedy had when he was appointed AG of the US at the same age.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Oct 22, 2020 14:39:06 GMT -5
And ironically, since RFK started his career working for Joe McCarthy, I bet (speculative of course)that if there had been a Federalist Society in those days he would have been a member before he transferred over to Estes Kefauver's Committee.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2020 15:00:02 GMT -5
She has more federal experience than Sandra Day O'Connor had before she went to the SC and as much trial experience as Robert Kennedy had when he was appointed AG of the US at the same age. Try and make a coherent argument. How does the ABA rating O'Conner, who was nominated by a Republican President, qualified prove it's biased against Republicans? Also please link me to the ABA's rating on Robert Kennedy? If you want to prove bias show me a Dem nominee with similar qualification/experience as the person you're defending receiving a favorable rating. You can't. That's why you're bringing up things that were 50 to 65 years ago that are not relevant, and do nothing to prove your point.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,243
|
Post by SSHoya on Oct 22, 2020 15:26:08 GMT -5
IMO, the more the sociopath implies that Coney Barrett was nominated to overturn the ACA, the more it makes it likely that she recuses herself, if for nothing else, the instutional integrity of the Court. Or if she doesn't recuse herself after consulting her fellow justices, she upholds the ACA as the severability argument would seem to lead to that result. Democrats seized Thursday on Trump’s acknowledgment in his “60 Minutes” interview that he would like the Supreme Court to end the Affordable Care Act, saying that it is further evidence that he is trying to take health care away from Americans. During the interview — a recording of which the White House released ahead of its scheduled airing Sunday — Trump told CBS News journalist Lesley Stahl that he hopes the court abolishes the policy, commonly known as Obamacare. “I hope that they end it; it’ll be so good if they end it,” Trump said. Pressed by Stahl how he would respond to millions of Americans losing their health insurance, Trump insisted that he has a plan, even though he has not released one. “Now we know why Trump was so mad about this interview,” Democratic National Committee spokesman Daniel Wessel said in a statement. “He just made it transparently obvious to the American people that his only plan for health care is to take away yours. Trump’s demand that the Supreme Court overturn the Affordable Care Act would rip health care away from tens of millions of Americans and end protections for as many as 133 million Americans with preexisting conditions.” During the confirmation hearing of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, Democrats repeatedly argued that placing Trump’s nominee on the Supreme Court would result in the abolishment of the ACA. -- The Washington Post, 10/22/20 When a federal law has no severability clause, Justice Brett Kavanaugh said in a ruling Monday, there is a "strong" presumption of that the unlawful part be removed without disturbing the entirety of the law. The court next term will address the severability of the ACA's individual mandate. www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2020/07/06/justices-fresh-views-on-severability-could-boost-obamacare-defenders/
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 23, 2020 10:43:52 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2020 6:08:52 GMT -5
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,730
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Oct 24, 2020 9:20:09 GMT -5
Bork was the first modern candidate specifically derailed over political issues, not his legal career. Even his opponents would admit Bork was a legal scholar.
As for the others cited, Abe Fortas was derailed by Democrats over his business dealings (he took money for speeches while on the bench) and having served as a confidant to LBJ while sitting on the Court. The opinions of Carswell and Haynesworth were seen as favorable to segregationists and the liberal Republican wing (when such existed) voted against Nixon on both.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,474
|
Post by DanMcQ on Oct 24, 2020 20:28:27 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,474
|
Post by DanMcQ on Oct 25, 2020 9:52:50 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2020 14:53:24 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,474
|
Post by DanMcQ on Oct 26, 2020 2:11:46 GMT -5
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,189
|
Post by hoyarooter on Oct 26, 2020 20:57:36 GMT -5
Fascinating. Everything old is new again?
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,474
|
Post by DanMcQ on Oct 27, 2020 6:00:56 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,474
|
Post by DanMcQ on Oct 27, 2020 6:29:27 GMT -5
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 30,474
|
Post by DanMcQ on Oct 28, 2020 12:38:18 GMT -5
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Oct 28, 2020 15:37:41 GMT -5
I hope Republicans don't moan as much when the Democrats sweep the White House and both houses of Congress Tuesday as the Democrats are moaning about Barrett's confirmation.
|
|
hoyajinx
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 2,332
|
Post by hoyajinx on Oct 28, 2020 15:57:54 GMT -5
I hope Republicans don't moan as much when the Democrats sweep the White House and both houses of Congress Tuesday as the Democrats are moaning about Barrett's confirmation. Not even remotely equivalent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2020 16:20:27 GMT -5
I hope Republicans don't moan as much when the Democrats sweep the White House and both houses of Congress Tuesday as the Democrats are moaning about Barrett's confirmation. Do you think they would moan if Dems started added seats to the court to combat Reps naked power grab?
|
|