Justice Kennedy Retiring!

[mountaineer]

Americans who happen to be homosexual. 

[Bigun]

I know you are referring to Kennedy's rulings regarding Americans who happen to be homosexual.  I disagree that he had anything at all in common, as a matter of judicial philosophy, with the Wise Latina.   As I see it, he had the wisdom to apply the Constitution's protections in the context of changed circumstances.   The Constitution's guarantee of the law's equal protection applies to us all.

The Constitution says what it says and not what you, Justice Kennedy, or anyone else thinks or wishes it to say.  Changed circumstances have not a damned thing to do with it.

[Jazzhead]

Clarence Thomas has been a great justice.  I admire him so much. 

But, hey, there is a reason for stereotyping ...it's usually true.

But why do you stereotype with respect to Amul Thapar, a superior judge by most conservatives' reckoning, just because he happens to be of Indian descent?   

How much better off we'd all be if we took Martin Luther King's admonition to heart, rather than paying it lip service.  Judge the man by the content of his character, not his ethnicity or membership in an arbitrary "identity" group.

But I will throw this out - Asian Americans are the biggest victims of the left's prejudices.   They keep their families intact, work hard, emphasize achievement and personal responsibility,  and ace most college aptitude tests.   And the left insists on denigrating their chances to get into the best schools because they're not the right sort of minority. 

I'd love to see that sort of "minority" perspective on the Court.       

[Jazzhead]

Americans who happen to be homosexual. 

Have they lost their status as Americans in your view?  Are they not entitled to the law's equal protection in your view?   

[Hoodat]

I know you are referring to Kennedy's rulings regarding Americans who happen to be homosexual.  I disagree that he had anything at all in common, as a matter of judicial philosophy, with the Wise Latina.   As I see it, he had the wisdom to apply the Constitution's protections in the context of changed circumstances.   The Constitution's guarantee of the law's equal protection applies to us all.

Short of an act of Congress, there is NOTHING in the Constitution that prohibits a State from formulating its own laws in regard to marriage, or for that matter, abortion.  Nothing.  Zip.  Nada.

As for Equal Protection, it died the moment that one class was given special status over another at the expense of other classes.  But then such are the pitfalls of judicial tyranny when the Constitution is ignored.

[Jazzhead]

The Constitution says what it says and not what you, Justice Kennedy, or anyone else thinks or wishes it to say.  Changed circumstances have not a damned thing to do with it.

And what it says is that all Americans are entitled to the law's equal protections.  No exceptions.  Period.   

[Jazzhead]

As for Equal Protection, it died the moment that one class was given special status over another at the expense of other classes. 

Equal protection, thanks to the wisdom of the SCOTUS, is alive and well.  Christians and their dogmas and prejudices aren't accorded any special status.  None. Zip. Nada.   

[GrouchoTex]

He was better than the full-out activist, but I found some of his opinions to be unreadable legally, full of flowery bullshit about personal feelings and love that had nothing to do with the language of the Constitution, and everything to do with his personal feeling/ideology.  In those cases, he was as much of a legislator as the Wise Latina.

I will say that on "drier" issues to which he did not have an emotional reaction, he was pretty good at following the text and original intent.

It is true that throughout his tenure, you really were not sure which way he would rule.
He would just as likely rule left as he would right.

A very interesting thing happened in this last SCOTUS session.

There were 14 5-4 decisions this time.
All 5-4 decisions went to the right (or shall we say, less activist side) of the court.
In all 14 Kennedy was the 5th voice.
Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kennedy were the 5 in all 14 of these.

While his career was up and down from a conservative point of view, he sure went out with a bang.

[edpc]

Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kennedy were the 5 in all 14 of these.

Not on the internet tax decision.

[Cyber Liberty]

Are they not entitled to the law's equal protection in your view?   

"Equal" protection, not "superior."

[truth_seeker]

Absolutely not true.   That is stereotyping, pure and simple.   Trump's not going to nominate a identity-politics liberal.  He's going to nominate a judicial conservative.    Has Clarence Thomas' race affected his rulings?

Key words = Identity politics Fairness=Progressive=Social Justice=Equity=Post modernism=Intersectionality

etc.

These are the principles of current democrats, and most of what the Left has become.

Thoose concepts guide and justify acts to shut down free speech on campuses, with violence if necessary, violence by Antifa.

So while the words are just gentle words, the methods and tactics employed are violent.

So if you envision having to man the barricades, nice to know the slogans and messaging of your opponents

[Sanguine]

Have they lost their status as Americans in your view?  Are they not entitled to the law's equal protection in your view?   

The point of Justice being blind includes being colorblind.

[Jazzhead]

The point of Justice being blind includes being colorblind.

Then we agree. 

[Jazzhead]

It is true that throughout his tenure, you really were not sure which way he would rule.

Is that a bad thing?

  A very interesting thing happened in this last SCOTUS session.

There were 14 5-4 decisions this time.
All 5-4 decisions went to the right (or shall we say, less activist side) of the court.
In all 14 Kennedy was the 5th voice.
Alito, Thomas, Roberts, Gorsuch, and Kennedy were the 5 in all 14 of these.

While his career was up and down from a conservative point of view, he sure went out with a bang.

And that is why I do not want it forgotten that Justice Kennedy was a superb and impartial jurist.   I sense some here are glad to see him go.  I think he was one of the Court's leading lights. 

[GrouchoTex]

Not on the internet tax decision.

This was an odd one to be sure.
Kennedy, wrote the opinion, that overturnned his own precedent.
Oddly, Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Ginsburg, all agreed with that part of it.

From the Wall Street Journal:

"Justice Anthony Kennedy, who suggested years ago that the pre-Amazon.com precedent should be updated for the digital age, wrote for a majority that defied conventional ideological lines. Liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg joined his opinion, along with conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch."

You could say this isn't conservative, because it raises taxes, and no conservative wants that.

However, you could say it is conservative, because it opens the states up to decide to tax or not, via the 10th Amendment.
Not making the states do it, of course, but not stopping them if they choose to.

[aligncare]

...changed circumstances...

That’s a great point. When circumstances change, smart people change their thinking to incorporate the new paradigm: equal protection + social change

To do otherwise is to risk denying to some members of society the blessings of freedom that we all get to enjoy in America.

[GrouchoTex]

Is that a bad thing?



And that is why I do not want it forgotten that Justice Kennedy was a superb and impartial jurist.   I sense some here are glad to see him go.  I think he was one of the Court's leading lights.

I won't say the he was a bad jurist, just a moderate one, which is better than being a liberal one.

I think it boils down to this:

On most social issues that come before the court, it usually comes down to is it a 10th or 14th amendment issue.
The right would lean 10th and left 14th, but not always 100% of the time, written in stone.
Ending Jim Crow via the 14th was the right thing to do.
Allowing abortion under the 14th?
That argument is still raging today.

My own personal opinion is that the 14th is used too often to end or allow a practice that wasn't originally intended to be covered by the 14th, but I am more conservative than Kennedy, and others.

[Right_in_Virginia]

That’s a great point. When circumstances change, smart people change their thinking to incorporate the new paradigm: equal protection + social change

To do otherwise is to risk denying to some members of society the blessings of freedom that we all get to enjoy in America.

Can you give an example of what you're referring to vis-à-vis the new paradigm:  equal protection + social change?   I'm not sure what you mean by this.   Thx.

@aligncare

[Sanguine]

This may be helpful:

THE RUN-DOWN: Here's What You Need To Know About Trump's Top 5 Possible Nominees

https://www.dailywire.com/news/32411/run-down-heres-what-you-need-know-about-trumps-top-ben-shapiro?utm_source=shapironewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=062818-news&utm_campaign=position2

[Bigun]

This may be helpful:

If that is true and he has indeed pared the list down to those five then it should be Thomas Hardiman hands down.

With respect to Brett Kavanaugh I would remind you of this:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/06/there_is_something_fishy_about_one_of_trumps_potential_supreme_court_nominees_.html

[txradioguy]

Kennedy has been the source of that unpredictability on SCOTUS, which is why I don't want him replaced by another Kennedy.

@Cyber Liberty

Exactly! 

[txradioguy]

My own personal opinion is that the 14th is used too often to end or allow a practice that wasn't originally intended to be covered by the 14th, but I am more conservative than Kennedy, and others.

QFT

[Cyber Liberty]

Absolutely not true.   That is stereotyping, pure and simple.

And Obama didn't boast about his "Wise Latina" pick.

[Bigun]

The writers of and those that passed the 14th amendment into law had NO intention for it to mean what activist judges have interpreted it to mean!

[Jazzhead]

This may be helpful:

Thanks, @Sanguine .  It is good to see that the President is acting swiftly to pare down the list and announce his choice sooner rather than later.  It is absolutely critical to confirm the new Justice before the election, not only because the GOP still controls the Senate, but because we don't need the SCOTUS as an issue motivating liberals to get out and vote. 

Good, too,  to see Hardiman and Thapar are on the list. Also Amy Barrett - who's a practicing Catholic and, as some will recall, the judge that the Dems were determined to deep-six for the temerity of having religious beliefs.