Although now that I’ve posted it, I suppose appointing your horse is more traditional in these sorts of governments.
Perhaps you missed the word “theoretically” in my post?
Not quite true. The tables would necessarily include people who are already in poor health and therefore would not live as long as the average.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
Except you’re serious, aren’t you?
My God, you’re what’s wrong with the world.
NO! The outcome of the case is not sufficient to reach that conclusion.
If the judges correctly applied bad law, and reached a bad result, then the problem is that the law needs to be changed. Judges apply the law to the facts before them. If the law is bad, then it’s very likely the result of a fair-minded, honest application of the law will produce a bad result.
Careful, you’ll end up on his list of people that have “no business participating in political discussion” :rolleyes:
So wide open that the theoretical possibilities could be scary. Pat Robertson for SCOTUS!? Ted Nugent as Chief Judge of a Federal Appeals court? Place Steve Bannon on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals?
Any of those would make us hope Trump nominates his sister for an opening instead. At least she was a real judge and had broad enough appeal to be nominated by a Republican (Reagan to District Court) and a Democrat (Clinton to Appeals Court).
Bricker, unlike you, I believe that judges have a responsible to be moral. The proper interpretation of a law is the moral one, regardless of whether that’s the interpretation which was originally intended. I am just as frightened by the prospect of an amoral judge as I am of an amoral legislator or executive.
What do you even need a court? Just get one truly moral man in charge, and the law will be what he says it is. All of this foofraw about rule of law and balancing powers is stuff and nonsense, I say.
Howabout I take first turn as the Truly Moral Person in charge?
I would go with Spahn and Sain and pray for rain. 
Which morality should a judge use when doing this?
Yet Supreme Court decisions are rarely unanimous. They’re even often, and depressingly, predictable along ideological and partisan lines. How can that happen, in your philosophy?
And if we had a way of reliably identifying one truly moral person, that would work just fine.
Hey, me too! With moral judges, abortion will be stopped immediately.
From NPR’s article:
…But it is unlikely that Kennedy will remain on the court for the full four years of the Trump presidency. While he long ago hired his law clerks for the coming term, he has not done so for the following term (beginning Oct. 2018), and has let applicants for those positions know he is considering retirement.
That depends on which morality the judges are supposed to adhere to. I’m still waiting to hear an answer to my question about that.
To follow up on that - if Kennedy retires around the time speculated in that article (right before the midterms), the vacancy on the SC probably will add quite a dollop of motivation the Republicans to vote, like it did for the 2016 elections.
Isn’t “quite a dollop” an oxymoron? Not to mention the motivation that Democratic-leaning voters will experience.
The general assumption is that the Democratic-leaning voters will be at peak motivation due to Trump hatred. Some Republican voters may not be motivated enough due to “Trump fatigue”. The vacancy on the SC will perk them right up.
While I don’t know that there’s a perfect way to measure this, the open SCOTUS seat in 2016 seems to have been a Republican advantage (or at least that seems to be the media narrative that’s been established). For example, according to CNN’s exit polls, for the 21% of voters that said Supreme Court appointments were “the most important factor” in their vote, Trump won 56% to 41%. He lost all the other categories (“an important factor” / “a minor factor” / “not a factor at all”)
How would him retiring “right before the midterms” have that kind of effect? Wouldn’t any lame-duck Republican senators just rubber-stamp anybody that Trump nominates after the election but before the new guys take their seats?
The empty SC seat & liberal hatred of Trump certainly didn’t create a blue wave in November. If that’s all Democrats are banking on yet again, then we are truly doomed in 2020.
Sent from my R1 HD using Tapatalk