The following is a list of potential candidates Donald Trump has offered as a replacement for the Supreme Court seat being vacated next month by Justice Kennedy, who is retiring.
Amy Coney Barrett, 46. of Indiana. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Former law professor at the University of Notre Dame. Nominated to the Seventh Circuit by Donald Trump last year
Keith Blackwell, 42, of Georgia. Supreme Court of Georgia. Associate justice of the Georgia Supreme Court since June 2012.
Charles Canady, 64, of Florida. Supreme Court of Florida. Republican Congressman from 1992 to 2000, associate justice of Florida Supreme Court since 2008.
Steven Colloton, 55, of Iowa. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Associate in office of Ken Starr, the Bill Clinton special counsel. Nominated to the Eighth Circuit by George W. Bush in 2003
Allison Eid, 53, of Colorado. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Solicitor general of Colorado form 2006 to 2006, then associate justice of the Colorado Supreme Court until Novfember 2017. Nominated by Donald Trump to the Tenth Circuit in 2017, succeeding Neil Gorsuch’s seat
Britt Grant, 40, of Georgia. Supreme Court of Georgia. Solicitor general of Georgia from 2015 to 2017, associate justice of the Georgia Supreme Court from January 2017. Currently waiting for Senate vote on nomination by Donald Trump to U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Raymond Gruender, 54, of Missouri. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. U.S. Attorney for Eastern District of Missouri, 2001-2004. Nominated to the Eighth Circuit by George W. Bush in 2004
Thomas Hardiman, 53, of Pennsylvania. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Nominated to the federal bench for the Western District of Pennsylvania by George W. Bush in 2003. Nominated by Bush to the Third Circuit in 2007
Brett Kavanaugh, 53, of Maryland. U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. White House staff secretary to George W. Bush from 2003 until 2006. Nominated by Bush to the D.C. Circuit in 2006
Raymond Kethledge, 51, of Michigan. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Private practice 1998 to 2008. First nominated to Sixth Circuit by George W. Bush in 2006. Nominated again in 2008
Joan Larsen of Michigan, 49, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Associate justice of the Michigan Supreme Court 2015 – 2017. Nominated to the Sixth Circuit by Donald Trump in November 2017.
Mike Lee of Utah, 47. United States Senator. Private practice 2007-2010. Junior senator from Utah since 2001. Brother of Thomas Lee (below).
Thomas Lee of Utah, 53. Supreme Court of Utah. Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the George W. Bush administration 2004-2005. Nominated to the Utah Supreme Court 2010. Brother of Mike Lee (above).
Edward Mansfield, 61, of Iowa. Supreme Court of Iowa. Iowa Court of Appeals 2009-2011. Associate Justice of the Iowa Supreme Court since 2011
Federico Moreno, 66, of Florida. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Nominated to the federal bench in 1990 by George H.W. Bush. Nominated to the Eleventh Circuit in 1992 by Bush but Senate did not hold vote before Bush lost
Kevin Newsom, 45, of Alabama. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Solicitor general of Alabama 2003-2007. Nominated to the Eleventh Circuit by Donald Trump in 2017
William Pryor, 56, of Alabama. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Attorney general of Alabama 1997 to 2004. Nominated to the Eleventh Circuit by George W. Bush, 2004. Chairman of the U.S. Sentencing Commission since 2017
Margaret Ryan, 54, of Virginia. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. judge Advocate, U.S. Marine Corps, 1995-1999. Nominated to the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces by George W. Bush 2006. (Not photographed)
David Stras, 43, of Minnesota. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Associate justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, 2010-2018. Nominated to the Eight Circuit by Donald Trump, 2018
Diane Sykes, 60, of Wisconsin. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Associated justice of the Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1990-2004. Nominated to the Seventh Circuit by George W. Bush, 2004
Amul Thapar, 49, of Kentucky. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Kentucky 2006-2008. Nominated to the Sixth Circuit by George W. Bush 2008.
Timothy Tymkovich, 61, of Colorado. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. Solicitor general of Colorado 1991-1996. Nominated to the Tenth Circuit by George W. Bush, 2003
Robert Young, 67, of Michigan. Supreme Court of Michigan (retired). Michigan court of appeals judge 1995-1998. Associate justice then chief justice of the Michigan Supreme Court 1998-2017
Don Willett, 51, of Texas. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Associate justice of the Texas Supreme Court, 2005-2018. Nominated to the Fifth Circuit by Donald Trump, 2018
Patrick Wyrick, 37, of Oklahoma. Supreme Court of Oklahoma. Solicitor General of Oklahoma, 2011-2017. Associate justice of the Oklahoma Supreme Court since 2017. Nominated to the federal bench for the Western District of Oklahoma in 2018 by Donald Trump and awaiting Senate vote
The conservative appointed justices have towed the conservative party line up to this point I have zero confidence that anything will change as long as they are the majority unless demacrats get control of the Senate A Democrat is elected president and a conservative appointed justice retires and is replaced by said President. That’s a lot to hope for
Dofinotipn of Liberty: Free from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on ways wzu of life, behaviour or political views. Zsex offender registry doesnt even pass the Preamble. So, no matter who, Their is no longer a Constitution
with SCOTUS at times it is either a conservative Vs. liberal ruling where the decisions are split and there is a swing vote ( which was Kennedy ) or they can all agree and rule on an issue unanimously – these are usually the cases where there is a universal constitutional issue at hand – such was the case with Packingham. Justice Gorsuch (appointed by Trump) dissented United States vs. Nichols ( which was a SORNA issue ) and SCOTUS “unanimously” backed his dissent reversing the 10th circuit ruling. I think at this point, RSO issues are not so much to worry about ( although I’d still worry lol. because anything can happen ). But From reading on a few conservative circles, I’d be more worry with issues like chipping away or completely overturning Roe V. Wade and similar strong conservative stands like this than anything else.
I know that politically the Republicans want a conservative and the Democrats want a liberal. I feel that both ‘wants’ are wrong. I personally want a justice on the Supreme Court who knows the Constitution inside and out and understands and knows the original intent when it was put into place. I realize that social situations may have changed since then but the ‘bench’ is not the place to make adjustments. That’s the responsibility of Congress and the voters through the amendment process. I have often asked myself how something can be constitutional 10 years ago and now unconstitutional…and vice versa… without a constitutional convention? Based upon my knowledge of the Constitution that was not the original intent of our Founding Fathers.
Capt,
the more i read your post’s, the more i like you.. i also, feel that wanting a “liberal ” or ” conservative” judge is wrong, i want a justice that know the constitution, and rules by it, no his or her party affiliation or their own personal emotions or views
As long as our leaders let emotion, paranoia, and false information rule their decisions we will continue to see this nation move further and further from our founding Constitution and who knows what negative consequences will take place if that is allowed to continue ? The place to update the Constitution is in Congress and at the voting polls, not at some judge’s desk. Until there is an amendment that has not yet been incorporated through the established process, we must insist on the original intent as put forth in writing by our Founding Fathers. Part of our problem is that either too many of our citizens are ‘clueless’ as to what is in the Constitution or they just don’t care and want do do whatever ‘feels good’ at the time. Example…where in the Constitution does a woman have the right to ‘murder’ an unborn human baby…article and section? She has the right to refuse sex or if forced, she has the right to see the perpetrator pay for the dastardly deed. The baby is nothing more than an innocent bystander and deserves a chance at life. We throw around the term ‘constitutional’ far too often with nothing in the Constitution to back it up.
Well, as for abortion, the good news is that we have managed to kill 50 million people since the early 1970’s, the majority of whom would have likely grown up and voted Democrat. That should make conservatives happy. If we keep this up, this problem should eventually take care of itself. (insert FAC official Swiftian sarcasm warning here) 😉
Does anybody really think it matters who gets in there??????????????
10000% it does
It doesn’t matter who gets in there nor does it matter their beliefs weather all these sex laws are constitutional or not, they know just like the rest sitting in this court that if they even hint that they disagree with the sex offender laws in any way shape or form they wont be around that court for long and their career and life as they know it is over. And FAC, I asked you this question last week but for some reason you chose not to publish my question/post. Maybe you have had time to think it over. When you say [10000% it does] matter who gets in there could you please explain exactly how it will matter and please be specific. Good luck.
Bruce – here is your answer with specificity.
1) the SCOTUS justices are appointed with tenure for life. They are not elected, they are not fired. They can only be impeached by the House and removed by the Senate for “high crimes and misdemeanors.” The reason for their lifetime tenure is to enable them to make decisions free from any pressure by the executive or legislative branches of government. Since the Supreme Court first convened in 1790, there have been 113 justices and only one (Samuel Chase in the early 1800s) ever has been impeached.
2) the SCOTUS HAS disagreed with sex offender laws in several shapes and forms, most recently in Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S. Ct. 1730 – Supreme Court 2017 (where they held sex offender laws cannot ban someone from social media) or Nichols v. US, 136 S. Ct. 1113 – Supreme Court 2016 (where they reversed a conviction of someone who failed to register a move outside the country, finding the sex offender law could not apply). They also, recently, denied certiorary in Snyder upholding the 6th Circuit decision on the retroactively of sex offender laws). The sitting justices (absent Gorsuch, who was just appointed) were all part of these decisions and they are all still around the court and their careers and lives are not over.
3) Take, for example, retiring Justice Kennedy, who was the swing vote in some landmark cases such as Obergefell v. Hodges (2015 – effectively legalizing gay marriage), Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010- campaign contributions are protected by the first amendment), Roper v. Simmons (2005 – death penalty for juveniles constitutes cruel and unusual punishment), and who cannot forget Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992 – which upheld Roe v. Wade – a woman’s right to an abortion). These are all cases where one justice’s vote could have swayed the direction of these laws one way or the other.
We don’t need your wishes for good luck!
That type of thinking its detrimental to society. These are positions of authority that affect every American whether directly or indirectly.
This also applies to every elected position being sought on state levels.
Still think it doesn’t matter who gets elected where? Assuming you have the right to vote but chose not to? You also have no place in complaining about who is in office.
Which one of these nominee’s is actually against the registry, and which one’s are pushing for tougher laws against sex offenders? This would be nice to know.
Since Mr. Trump just stated in a rally yesterday that he wants someone who will be there for 40 years, I am guessing that it will be one of the youngest on the list. Apparently he is meeting with each person he considers face to face, so anyone who wants the job will have to kiss his ring (or something else) to get it. The conservative justices have leaned toward reining in some of the harsh practices toward criminal defendants in state courts, but who knows what they will do (or fail to do) in regards to the nonsensical sex offender registry laws.
Let us not forget Obama signed IML even after numerous emails and letters from us and our advocates denouncing it. One of the best rulings in our favor was from the 6th circuit where conseratives placed by George Bush found the registry full of shit. Then Donald Trumps DOJ confirmed their ruling. There are as many democrats on the registry as republicans. So lets cut the bullshit. It’s definitely going to depend on the mind set of the newly appointed Justice, liberal or conservative…
.
Gerald that was exactly my take on the issue. Anyone over 60 is definitely out, anyone over 50 maybe 5% Chance.That narrows it down considerably.
I would rather have a justice on the court who will be there for only 10 years but will follow the US Constitution regardless of his/her party affiliation, than to have someone there for 40 years who will trample the US Constitution and base decisions on personal and politically driven reasoning.