Justice Kennedy: I Really Don’t Care, Do U?

[sjoes006]

Kennedy end career on shameful note

I love Melania’s question because it’s begging the question. Do you really care? Do you care?

Kennedy’s recent vote is not in accordance with his usual precedent. While he is the swing vote he does tend to hold to his own constitutional theory which I don’t see resembled in his vote on the Muslim Ban.

Now he he is retiring and the most turbulent time in American history since I’ve been alive right after this horrible round of decisions.

A moderate he is not. As a student of the court Kennedy was never a great justice he simply found himself in a powerful position. He did make some good decisions but he was never the writer Scalia was and his jurisprudence, as mythical as it is, isn’t that great.

I usually hated most of his opinions even when he was supporting my side of the decision.

He can't make it 5 more months to retire? He should have retired when McConnell was holding the country hostage under Obama after Scalia died.

Sandra Day O’Connor retired under Bush after he won re-election. So I get it. But it’s the election part that I don’t get.

We we have a coo coo bird baby Justice onboard and the Swing vote can’t hold off until elections? Help me understand.

[ShortCircuit]

People have gotten it wrong for so long. The Supreme Court is not about liberalism vs conservatism, it's about loose constructionism vs strict constructionism.

I'm a Libertarian, and I am by no means allegiant to the GOP. However, I fail to see more justices who aim to uphold the integrity of the sacred document that is responsible for procuring the most prosperous nation in the world as anything but positive.

[sjoes006]

I think what you are meaning to hint around is those that believe in a living constitution or those that hold to the intent at the time it was written.

This is certainly one aspect of jurisprudence but judges are human and come with their own beliefs and biases even though they do try and keep them out of the court it is impossible.

Chief Justice Roberts doesn’t want to overturn Roev Wade for Constitutional reasons, he wants to overturn it because he is personally against abortion for religious reasons.

Roe v Wade is over 40 years old. It is precedent set in concrete at this point. We aren’t still arguing about it on Constitutionality. it’s standard case law that has been used again and again as precedent in other cases that were upheld.

And that is how the constitution actually functions through the courts. It’s the paper a mountain of case law was built on. You can’t simply just go back to the document ignoring prior rulings.

[ShortCircuit]

I agree with everything you just said. Which is exactly why I think instead of trying to balance the court between liberals and conservatives, we should hire justices that have displayed that they can set aside their personal biases and rule by pure constitutionality. That way we need not pay any attention to their political opinions.

I don't want Roe v Wade overturned. So I'm on the same side you are. However, strict constructionism highly correlates with conservative political beliefs. So although there are some biased conservative justices, I would argue that a liberal justice would be even more likely to be biased.

Quite frankly, I don't understand why strict constructionism has come to be associated with conservatism and loose constructionism with liberalism. I would be just as likely to support the nomination of a liberal justice if I knew he/she was a strict constructionist.

[Anonymous]

You say you don't care … and then say why couldn't he have held off.

I mean he was a bit … unreliable for either side, so that made him a swing voter, but as you say, I don't think he was much a moderate as … scattered.

But the likelihood is he will be replaced by someone who is significantly more conservative.

[sjoes006]

If you read the post and don’t take the header in its face you’d see I was using this sardonically. As, I believe, the First Lady was with her jacket that inspired my quote.

Sort of daring people to actually care and get off their asses.

This stuff matters. It’s easy to dismiss people who get upset over politics and the courts as being overly concerned with something that does t affect their everyday lives. It’s really easy to think that because the ways in which it does shape your everyday after often invisible.

But this WILL NOT be invisible. Reversing Roe v Wade will have a real and visible impact.

Sure abortions are down. But if you live in. State like Texas where it can be a 10 hour ride to another state or you must cross the border that takes the right to choose off the table for both men and women.

If you live in one state and cross the border to another to get an abortion can you be arrested? These are things we are going to find out. Texas will probably b

[Opinion Owner]

Missed the sarcasm and coat reference.

I find it amazing tbh how different it can be.

Here in Canada the court struck down the old abortion law decades ago... and the government couldn’t agree on a new one. So now there’s -none- And now support for even banning third trimester is so low that it’s almost political suicide for parties to touch it (the odd rural rep quietly supports but it generally muzzled by the parties)

[DoctorWize]

I care who is in the seat of Supreme Court justices. I will bet that President Trump and everyone involved, will make good choices. I hear the older lady Justice Ginsberg is sick. Will she be replaced this year?

[sjoes006]

Nice trolling. Yep RBG is 85 and the next oldest on the bench is about to turn 80 and also a liberal.

But RBG has had cancer so many times and I really don’t think it’s appropriate to hope for her demise.

Even I find nice things to say about Scalia and give him credit where due. His crafting and writing of decisions are masterpieces whether you like them or not. He’s up in the top 5 I’d say for overall beautifully written, referenced and reasoned decisions. He usually did stick true to case law and precedent.

I would never have wished Scalia’s death to get him off the court even after the deplorable things he said and asked during the hearing on the case that gave gays equal rights.

These justices are holding to their model of the constitution and what they think is right.

But the one thing they don’t do is retire under a president or Congress they don’t agree with. Scalia held on trying to wait Obama out.

Kennedy retiring now is a slap in the face of check and balance.

[sjoes006]

You think RBG wants to be working at 85 or Breyer at 80? No.

If you’ve been the swing vote on the court that has been more or less balanced for over 40 years you don’t retire under these terms.

History will not look kindly upon Kennedy, that I can say. Hewas nothing more than a vote to be catered to. He seems to lack respect for the idea of government entirely. So now he sees the federal government falling apart and says, now’s the time to strike whilst the iron is hot and really see this shit house burn to the ground.

Thanks Kennedy.

[nightdrot]

This does not seem like much in the way of analysis and is more of a rant.

To start, as a personal matter, Justice Kennedy is in his 80s and his wife recently took a severe fall and he has been caring for her. Perhaps that is part of the reason for his decision to retire.

Secondly, your analysis of Kennedy is somewhat askew. His rulings have been in the libertarian tradition. Tending to be what Americans call liberal on social questions - see also abortion and gay marriage, while conservative on business and economic issues - see also the recent ruling on union dues. On national security questions - see also the immigration ruling - he has tended to defer to the Executive branch.

Beyond that, it is not likely that he would have waited till the after the mid-term elections in any case. In part, because he does hew to a certain political philosophy and he is under no obligation to await an electoral outcome that might negatively impact those views.

Also, and perhaps just as significantly, because waiting 5 months would put his retirement in the middle of the Court's session. Customarily that is why Justices - unless because of illness or other such factors - wait till summer to retire as that give the Senate time to confirm a successor before the Court begins its new term on the first Monday in October.

While I grant that Justice Kennedy should have consulted you before announcing his retirement - and perhaps also had you critique his legal rulings in light of your not especially obvious expertise in constitutional law - these things may have influenced his decision to retire when he did. As to why you should care, as George Will once wrote, "Most passions centered on politics are disproportionate." So perhaps you shouldn't.

No matter, for someone whose question is premised on the idea that you do not care, the intemperate tone of your question-cum-editorial certainly suggests otherwise. The lady doth protest too much, perhaps?

[madhatters4]

yea this is a huge huge deal. the best the democrats and non-right people can hope is a democratic swing in mid term elections so they can hold up nominees who aren't rather moderate.

you are right kennedy was/isn't a brilliant judge. he was good and did write some good decisions but he was primarily important because he (whether by choice or simple confluence of his ideology) was routinely the swing vote and did serve as something of a moderate voice

[goaded]

He probably couldn't wait five more months;

"In recent years, pretty much the only major bank that’s been willing to lend to Trump has been Deutsche Bank, but luckily for Trump, Deutsche Bank has been willing to lend him more than $1 billion. And the bank’s global head of real estate capital markets during that time? One Justin Kennedy, son of Anthony Kennedy."

[MarketData]

Maybe he had a personal reason for retiring. Maybe his health isn't so great. Maybe he just wants more time to play golf. It doesn't all have to be a huge conspiracy.

[sjoes006]

It’s not a conspiracy. I hear a lot of excusing away and not a lot of caring. So I goes you’re in true who cares camp.

No complaining for you once the impact is finally on your doorstep. The time to say something will have come and gone. If you abstain from participating in a democracy then you can’t be surprised when it falls apart.

[MarketData]

Full disclosure: I'm not American, so I truly don't care. But the way the system works, if you vote Republican you will get a conservative legislature.

[HikerDude]

It's not just big, but YUUUUUGE! The judiciary will be conservative for the next 20 years.

[sjoes006]

Try 40 years at least. RBG is 85, Breyer is 79 about to be 80. So if the GOP remains in control of both houses after midterms the US is in trouble.

McConnell is going to try and ran someone ass into the open seat before November which he may likely be successful in doing if we don’t keep heat on this issue and the two GOP senators who are not for repealing Roe v. Wade. The two that said it is set precedent and will only confirm a Justice that sees it as set precedent not up to be overturned.

Honestly if it does get overturned this will be yet another embarrassment for the Us and proof that they don’t belong in the world order. Even Ireland has changed course on its abortion ban.

It’s not conservative it’s having a court that until now will try to stay somewhat in pace with public opinion. It’s the people’s court, not the politicians court.

[HikerDude]

You never know what will happen, though. Reagan appointed Kennedy, and he turned out to be pretty damn liberal on most issues.

[Toad-1]

Umm he actually voted conservatively on most issues but did occasionally vote for the other side too

[sjoes006]

The fact that he is considered liberal on any issue is absurd. Moderate at best but that’s where thing have gone. Roberts will be the new “moderate” swing vote and the two oldest on the court are in their 80’s and liberal votes.

With all the information we have at our fingertips today there aren’t surprises like we had with a few past nominees.

The only reaso. Roberts upheld the ACA in the manner that he did was to shred it to pieces. It should have been upheld under the commerce clause, its interstate commerce. He ruled as he did with clear intent.

They aren’t judges they are policy makers.

[HikerDude]

@Toad-1 Not at all. Kennedy was hated in conservative circles and considered the great mistake of the Reagan Administration.

[Toad-1]

Sure that maybe but as far as his records go he voted more conservatively than liberal.

[villageidiot]

The Reagan administration WAS a mistake!

[HikerDude]

@villageidiot You sound like a clueless liberal.

[legalboxers]

this is a dire problem right now. no swing vote, and will be according to what is being dictated to them. So right now, Roe v. Wade will be soon to do, followed by the undoing of Mapp c. Ohio and Miranda v. Arizona,
soon to followed by Brown v. Board of Ed.

[Viish]

I find the current Supreme court a bastion of Partisan attitude instead of delivering justice. Kennedy was a swing vote only in social cases; not economic ones. I find him to be a judge lacking the spine to stand up to his convictions. He always seems to vote in a manner that lacks conviction.
That is just my opinion by the way

[BillieJean1070]

You should care, this will shape the direction this country goes in for the next 25 plus years.

[villageidiot]

Where the hell were women in the 2016 election.

[BillieJean1070]

@villageidiot Voting for Trump I hope, even more with in 2020 along with blacks and Hispanics.

[Anonymous]

Forgive me for saying it, but it does indeed sound like you care. . .

[sjoes006]

I care care a great deal! Do u?

[Opinion Owner]

It'll be fine. Kennedy will retire and some other person will take his place. I don't understand the people who villify him for leaving now. He's not obligated to hold on just because Trump is pres. Also, and people forget this, Trump isn't even a conservative. He was a Democrat not too long ago. So as much of an ass as he may be the one area where he should cause the least concern for the greatest number of people, could well be court appointments.

[Anonymous]

Don't worry, trump will appoint a right winger and the court will continue to change established law.

[sjoes006]

Exactly. Established law, precedent be damned.

[Opinion Owner]

I fear what's coming. This nation has moved so far to the right that in many ways it resembles Europe in the early-mid twentieth century.

[rjroy3]

I think he wanted to leave at a time there's most likely to be someone like himself to take his place. He wants to preserve his legacy to some degree.

[Anonymous]

This is a major deal. You are 100% right. Kennedy was amazing and he was a amazing person. I realy like this

[sjoes006]

He isn’t an amazing person. I don’t know anyone who would think this left or right. He’s unreliable at best. He doesn’t right good opinions and he’s ruled on some good ones but he’s a wildcard.

It’s irresponsible for anyone not in support of Trump in the open to retire right now. Justices die on the court to avoid these things like Scalia did and RBG probably will as well.

You don’t retire from the court because you don’t want to decide whether or not a president can be criminally tried while still in office. You don’t let a criminal stsck the court.

[Prodigal_Son9]

I'm with @Waffles731 on this. Something bad about his health or some kind of familial issue probably sped up his impending retirement. The rumors of Justice Kennedy possibly stepping down had been circulating for a while.

[Waffles731]

I think he probably found ouy something about his health.
Maybe cancer.

[Anonymous]

Americans are so bored these days that seriously can do ANYTHING

[villageidiot]

You are correct. They are bored, disinterested and DUMB.

[jacquesvol]

He wants Trump to appoint another Tea Party judge.

[Anonymous]

Good news for conservatives.

[ovoxo_]

It looks like you care...

[ENTP_EMO]

I care

[Anonymous]

So what do it on a