Justice Kennedy Retiring; President Trump Selecting His Replacement is a Big Win for America…

Great news!

President Trump will pick someone from his “list” of judges who will uphold our Constitution, rather than “legislate from the bench.” The madness of the left’s agenda has mainly been forced on us by the courts, and that’s going to change…

The Supreme Court has already improved with the appointment of Justice Gorsuch, ruling against unions forcing non-members to pay dues (to be funneled to Democrats), ruling for the President’s travel ban, against forcing Christians to violate their beliefs, and upholding redistricting.

These are all huge blows to the “progressives.” Huge!

Justice Anthony Kennedy announced Wednesday that he is retiring, giving President Trump a critical opportunity to move the Supreme Court more solidly to the right in what promises to be an epic confirmation fight.

The 81-year-old senior associate justice informed the White House in a letter of his intention to step down from the high court after 30 years, effective July 31. Rumors of another vacancy have reverberated across Washington for months; the decision comes a year after Kennedy’s former law clerk Neil Gorsuch took over the seat occupied by the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Trump, reacting to the opportunity to select a second high court pick, called Kennedy a “great justice” and said he’d begin the search for a replacement immediately.

“Hopefully, we’re going to pick somebody who will be as outstanding,” Trump said.

On the Senate floor, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell vowed the chamber would vote “this fall” on Kennedy’s successor.

Arguably the most powerful member of the Supreme Court, Kennedy’s moderate-conservative views often left him the “swing” — or deciding — vote in hot-button cases ranging from abortion to gay rights to political campaign spending.

A Supreme Court vacancy will likely become a key issue in a midterm congressional election year, when control of the Senate is at stake.

That body will consider Trump’s latest high court nominee, requiring only a simple majority for confirmation. GOP leaders changed the rules when Gorsuch was being considered, to get rid of the 60-vote procedural filibuster threshold.

But Democrats are expected to try and transform the court opening into a broader political referendum on Trump’s leadership, and the future of social issues like immigration, gun rights and race.

Republicans, for their part, hope Kennedy’s replacement helps them in the November elections. Still, McConnell indicated he hopes for a vote in the fall.

Without Kennedy, the court will be split between four liberal justices who were appointed by Democratic presidents and four conservatives who were named by Republicans. Trump’s nominee is likely to give the conservatives a solid majority and will face a Senate process in which Republicans hold the slimmest majority, but Democrats can’t delay confirmation.

Kennedy was nominated to the court by President Ronald Reagan in 1987 and sworn in the following year.

While often voting with the court’s conservative bloc, he has been a key swing vote in a number of cases and occasionally sided with the court’s liberal wing, particularly on issues such as gay rights and abortion. Most notably, he wrote the 2015 ruling on Obergefell v. Hodges, which found that a ban on same-sex marriage was unconstitutional.

Via: FOX

I listened to leftist talk radio on the way home today, and they are in a panic. Some are saying that this will destroy the Democrat party. Let’s pray for that!

My mother couldn’t get a legal abortion and I can’t f*cking believe I have to worry my daughters won’t be able to either.

The kids I know who are DACA recipients, who are LGBTQ, who have medical and mental health issues, my heart just breaks for them. And we are the lucky ones, in a blue city/state with support and resources.

 

Replying to @embeedub

You could always suggest they have safe sex and actually plan a family. Maybe explain the dangers of unprotected sex and like maybe be a mother.

 

Replying to @embeedub

so, you’re upset your mother didn’t abort you? self-awareness isn’t very strong with you LOLOLOLOLOLOL

Replying to @embeedub

Have ya thought about teaching your daughter’s alternatives to abortion? Birth control, abstinence etc. Wow. just go right to the option that is most destructive including to your potential grandchild.

Replying to @embeedub

just spit-balling here… but that might be something you should be grateful for…

 

Replying to @embeedub

You’re upset that you weren’t aborted?

 

Replying to @embeedub

Like OMG!! like thats the 1st thing most parents think about! Hows about teaching them to have SAFE SEX! Close their legs ? Maybe? Or is Grandma “,teaching them the HIPPIE SWING?

 

Replying to @embeedub

OMG! This was my first thought when I heard this news too!! Where are my daughters going to get their abortions?!?!?!? I’m really sorry your mom couldn’t get her abortion. Stay strong.

 

Replying to @embeedub

So you literally wish your mother could have legally aborted you? Leftists really are unhinged.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “Justice Kennedy Retiring; President Trump Selecting His Replacement is a Big Win for America…

    1. I usually don’t post links to another site, especially with no comments, but it’s a decent article.
      One thing that I noticed that seems to always trip people up when they are analyzing Christians and the Holy Scriptures is:
      The commandment is “Thou shalt do no MURDER,” not “Thou shall not kill.”
      The ancient Hebrews (and their GOD) had several words for killing, just as we do now. Reading the scriptures, and going back to the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek languages reveals the meaning much more clearly on more topics than just this one.
      There’s no contradiction, or disconnect in the Scriptures. When those things seem to occur it’s usually because of a lack of understanding the text, the context, the audience, or the speaker.
      That’s why I ( a devout Christian) abhor abortion (murder), but cheer a mom who shot a thug in the face to save herself and her child (justifiable homicide).
      The two do not equate.
      One is wrong, the other is a righteous duty. JESUS himself said that governments are allowed by GOD to apply capitol punishment, and warfare is most certainly sanctioned by GOD…One of his titles is “Lord of Hosts,” which literally means “commander of the armies.”
      There are also times when believers can ignore and defy government. Obedience to laws is limited, and not always the default position for Christians and Jews.
      Thanks for the link.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Frank & Freeda , thank you for the insight. Your explanation certainly exhibits the nuance and complexity of biblical passages. I hope I didn’t do too faulty of a job of addressing the distinction in the blog entry. One tremendous take away I have is that the circumstances and intentions make a world of difference. Both from a biblical & a legal perspective. For years I grappled with the distinction from the social conservative paradigm. When you more closely examine the contingencies and variables attributing to the act that is what makes the distinction.

        Self-defense is a necessity. Acts of justice are as well. In the pro-life perspective abortion is the destruction of Innocent life. Which has no moral justification. Essentially not all killing is equal. Your explanation certainly solidifies this point.

        I greatly apppreciate the discourse and thank you again.

        Inverted Logic.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. And thank you!
          My “morals” and views were developed over decades of thought, prayer, and study. (I also wondered how the same GOD that said “Thou shalt not kill” could be ordering mass killing a few chapters in either direction of the commandments) It’s taken time for the answers to be revealed/ found…But I believe I’ve settled some of them…for me at least.
          Some conservatives, and some Christians, are truly stumped by the very question you addressed, and I always wonder why they’ve never considered such thing before they were asked. I think most liberals can’t understand it at all, and it appears to them to be hypocritical for believers in Christ to oppose abortion, yet strap on a firearm to defend themselves and their family.
          I’m trying to point out that to me, it’s not hypocritical at all and lay out my reasoning to help both sides understand how I justify them.
          Thanks for commenting.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Thank you for the further elaboration. I certainly see how it isn’t hypocrisy. It is a matter of a understanding catagorical subtleties. I think many pro-choice propotents are so focused on validating their convictions than looking at the whole picture. However, the reciprocal arguement could be thrown back in their court. If you are accepting of killing biologically existing life forms, why do you oppose self-defense and war?

            Personally, I would rather try to understand both sides of the coin versus condemning the opposing side. However, it is easy for me to be neutral as I do not have any skin in the game (directly). However, I understand the philosophical congruency of your stance. I respect it and find the moral arguments to be compellling.

            Liked by 1 person

Please, let us know what YOU think...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s