First?
Trump and the Republicans appear to be in the drivers seat in this one….
With 51 Republican Senators (McCain might not in the picture) and several Democratic Senators in rough spots?….Conformation is all but a forgone conclusion….
The Republican Senate Majority Leader will get the vote on a simple majority , putting aside the Democratic ability to make it a 60 vote thing….
Now?
A few Republican Senator’s like Collins, Murkowski, Flake and Corker could hold things up, but if Trump goes to the mat on this like we assume he would?
He’ll get his choice….
You never know….
But the party will be under pressure to do this as soon as possible with a eye towards the midterm’s and the 2019 possible Senate and with Robert Mueller aways lurking in the background….
The issue of Abortion and several other bench mark US Supreme Court decision could hang in the balance of the future of the court…..
For those who say that Politics should nothing to do with court?
Go home….
This is ALL about American politics and moves to drag this country back in time after a Democratic President sought to advance the country into the 21st Century’s changes……
The fight over President Trump’s next nomination to the Supreme Court began almost immediately after the news broke of the opening on Wednesday.
Moments after Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said he would retire, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said the Senate would act before the midterm election to confirm Trump’s next nominee.
“We will vote to confirm Justice Kennedy’s successor this fall,” McConnell said on the Senate floor.
Democrats immediately cried foul, arguing the nomination fight should come next year.
Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.), recalling the bitter fight over Merrick Garland’s nomination to the court in 2016, demanded that McConnell hold off until a new Congress is seated in 2019. He said Republicans should let voters weigh in on the choice through the November midterm elections.
Schumer said it would be the “height of hypocrisy” for Republicans to move quickly after they held open the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat for more than a year in 2016.
McConnell blocked Garland, former President Obama’s nominee for that seat, from getting even a hearing. He said at the time that voters needed to help decide the ideological balance of the court by picking a new president.
“Millions of people are just months away from determining the senators who should vote to confirm or reject the president’s nominee, and their voices deserve to be heard,” Schumer said Wednesday.
Other Democrats, including Minority Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (Calif.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, quickly echoed Schumer’s demands.
McConnell, for his part, called on Democrats to give Trump’s next pick fair consideration.
“It’s imperative that the president’s nominee be considered fairly and not subjected to personal attacks,” he said.
Democrats would appear to have little hope of blocking a Trump pick, though Republicans hold just 51 seats and usually have 50 members in the chamber given Sen. John McCain’s (R-Ariz.) battle with brain cancer.
Still, a vote before the midterm elections could be difficult for a number of Democratic senators facing reelection in states won by Trump, including Sens. Joe Manchin (W.Va.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) and Joe Donnelly (Ind.).
All are likely to face significant pressure to back Trump’s pick….
Ok…
We’ll count retiring US Senator Flake (R-Arz.) in Trump’s corner as usual….
…
Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) told the Arizona Republic that he would not try to strong-arm the Trump administration on tariffs — or other issues — by withholding his support from a Supreme Court nominee….
Politicalwire…
Of course not. Republucans support Trump. Even those who jawbone “opposition” will be in his corner where it matters.
The Hill
Collins suggests she won’t vote for Supreme Court nominee who doesn’t support Roe v. Wade hill.cm/XBF9vN8
President Trump has narrowed his Supreme Court shortlist to five people, including two women, he told reporters traveling with him to New Jersey today. He said he’ll be interviewing candidates this weekend and that he’ll announce the pick Monday, July 9…..
Axios
CBS has been regulatly polling on abortion for about 15 years, and the last poll show rhat support for abortion availability is at its highest level in those 15 years.
Those numbers do NOT matter to anti-abortion people….
Remember almost 60% of Americans do NOT approve of Trump’s actions…
He is working to install a minority court like his presidency…
Of course poll numbers don’t matter on issues like abortion to anti-abortionists. And frankly they shouldn’t. If someone believes abortion is always morally wrong and that this should be a government decision and not the wonan’s Decision, then they should fight for what they believe.
But should the majority rule?
I’ve never let poll numbers dictate my beliefs.
For example I have been in favor of at least partial legalization or decriminalization of small amounts of marijuana since the seventies, a stance that has only gained popular acceptance fairly recently.
Anti abortion people have been ,in my view, some of the most the most zealous advocates of an issue in my lifetime and have been at it for over forty years.
I don’t believe people’s beliefs are ,in general , are affected much by poll results ,if the beliefs are deeply held.On the other hand, among those who have no strong views on a given subject,I think they might be more influenced by such(the herd effect).
I agree with that sentiment. In 2004 I voted against the gay marriage ban in Missouri while it passed with 71% of the vote. I was even chided by our friend CG at the time for being “out of touch”. I was proud to be so then. And I’m proud to say that I’m not 0ut of touch on that sentiment now.
I suspect he still thinks it’s “out of touch” Scott.
I am more sanguine about this situation than most.
Even if Roe is overturned, many states will still allow abortions.Further, as I have pointed out before,there are many more health professionals around today who can perform what is a relatively simple procedure .In states where abortion may be outlawed if Roe is overturned,I would imagine a thriving underground industry will grow up,sort of like what happened during prohibition.
As to bringing criminal cases for illegal abortions?I believe such would be few and far between due to the proof issues involved and the success rate on what prosecutions would be brought will be very low.
In essence, a woman who wants an abortion will still be able to get one although it might be a little more difficult.
Finally,if Roe is overturned, what does the so called “pro life” movement do then?
The feeling is that court would NOT completely overturn the law…But would allow states to stop abortions by making them impossible within their borders…
This is NOT good….
It just gives the anti-abortionists the keys to get rid of the right in the future…
Roe made abortions a constitutional “right.”
It is difficult to see how a ruling could be fashioned to allow states to opt out of a constitutional right.
In my view, the odds are much better than 50/50 that a new Trump appointee will join with other Republican appointees in essentially overturning the Roe decision.
If abortion is no longer a”right” than certainly states would be free to pass legislation prohibiting it.
While Roe established the procedure as a”right,” states have been allowed to “regulate” it.That is what the myriad judicial fights over the oast 4 t years have been about, whether the “regulations” have unduly interfered with the “right.”
What you are referring to is a view by some that rather than mount a frontal attack on the “right” anti abortion groups will focus more on expanding the defining of “reasonable “ regulations which would allow the states to adopt so many regulations that it would be almost impossible to get one.
I think,however, that the more zealous foes of abortion will go for the kill .
Of course they will, they will oppose the will of the people because a clump of cells have more rights than immigrant children at our border.
You forgot about poor women Jack, the one’s that cannot afford family planning and preventative services that make abortion unnecessary in the first place.
The Republicans are focused on not only preventing abortion, but making it impossible for a poor women to prevent a pregnancy in the first place. And, depending on where a woman might live, it might make it ultimately financially impossible for them to reach an abortion provider.
Not sure why so many men are concerned about this subject and determined to tell a woman what they can and cannot do with their own body and their health choices. Especially men who will probably never get the opportunity to make a baby.
I’m not forgetting them..
In my view there will be people who will perform the procedure gratis.
I emphasize that I’m not liking what I see about to happen, but am just offering what I believe will be the alternative.
Of course this might all be 0a purely academic discussion.As we all have read here,CG and James believe that Trump is a “secret “ Democrat.Perhaps he will name a pro Choice Justice?(heh heh heh)
In the event that RvW is overturned, then yes some abortions will continue to take place in all states. But I believe that there will be some prosecutions of providers who perform abortions. The pro- Life movement isn’t Fighting for something that they are not willing and able to enforce. I know if I was on their side, then I wouldn’t either. I am surprised you believe otherwise.
And some abortion providers have already been killed because they perform abortions. I believe More abortion providers we’ll be killed – especially if they are performing abortions in states where it is ilkegal.
I didn’t say there wouldn’t be prosecutions..I said they would be few because of the difficulties in getting convictions.(see my post @9:26) Yes, I believe successful prosecutions will not be great in number for a host of reasons.
Just because something is illegal doesn’t mean there are a lot of prosecutions for the “crime.”
For example, here in S.C. ,where possession of marijuana even in small amount is unlawful, very few prosecutors (mostly Republicans I might add) bring cases due to the difficulty of getting convictions.
In my view, assuming the ending of Roe, there would likely be a Lufthansa of prosecutions initially(mostlyto pacify the por life movement you alluded to) and they would rapidly taper off due to the complexity of the proof issues I mentiined earlier.
As to abortion providers being killed.Actually the repeal of Roe would drive the provision of abortion services totally underground making such less likely in my view as the providers would not be publicly known.
Opponents of marijuana are not even remotely as zealous as opponents of abortion. so your analogy is not convincing.
As I now expect RvW to be overturned, I hope you (Jack) are right that the impact will not be as dire as I fear. As I respect your opinion, I feel a tad better. Time will tell.
My guess is that anyone (even if underground) who performs more than a few abortions will eventually become known to the pro-life movement.
A new Quinnipiac poll finds that American voters agree 63% to 31% with the U.S. Supreme Court Roe v. Wade decision on abortion.
There is almost no gender gap: Men agree 61% to 32%, while women agree 65% to 30%.
However, Republicans disagree with Roe v. Wade 58% to 36%. Every other listed party, gender, education, age and racial group agrees….
Politicalwire.com
Rand Paul will join others in voting FOR Brett Kavanaugh to join the Supreme’s…..
Ginsberg says she’ll stay on the court for another 5 years…..She also says that sooner of later the court WILL ‘swing back’ in another direction….
I don’t know why anyone takes Rand Paul’s “independence” seriously. Just another standard issue right wing Republican
I don’t…..
Paul used to stand out from other Republicans because like many less bertarians he cast a suspicious eye on national security agencies and issues and foreign “entanglements” like NATO.
That ,of course, was the Republican Party and media of three or so years ago.
Now? Paul’s views are well within the mainstream of conservative Republican thought, as well as the party Leader.
He’s no longer the Liberterian guy Jack?
Wait?
George Will is one of them Libertarian’s now, Right?
“Libertarians “
What are you talking about?
When did George Will beco,e a “libertarian.”
To my knowledge he has never claimed to be.
If you have something on that,please share it with us.
Check wiki Jack
Jack, Rand Paul’s position ontariffs and the feficit are not GOP mainstream.
Having Roe overturned has the potential to seeiously split the minority “pro life” community. Some will want providers and even women prosecuted for having abortions. I think many of those who have milked a woman’s right to choose for votes will pine for the good ole days when abortions were legal.
The fear is the ‘gradis’ procedures will be outlawed and not up to standards thus endangering lives like back in the day….
Again?
The right wants America to go BACKWARDS
Very good insight Keith
The piece points to slight of hand in all of this ….
It is hard for me to see RvW being reversed permanently. Even Ireland approved overwhelmingly voted to allow abortions. Eventually, hopefully sooner rather than later, society will recognize that this decision should not be left in the hands of the government.