Matt
Not that you need a lot of money to be a SC justice and interpret the Constitution correctly, but I find it odd that a man of his education and employment stature is so woefully unprepared financially for retirement, or his kid's college costs. Of course, a $255,000/year lifetime pension, if he's confirmed, will certainly help.
Matt
If the former, I'm good to go; the sad reality is we do have some laws that produce less than desirable outcomes but that is the responsibility of Congress to address, not the judiciary. I have no regard for judicial activists and that is not predicated upon which direction they err; neither is acceptable.
I agree with KPC and Trax's assessments on this nominee.
Good question. I think a SC judge should have a well-rounded knowledge of most things, including business and finances. After all, many of their cases, and the laws that apply, relate to those subjects. Kavanaugh's lack of net worth implies to me a lack of acumen in those areas. Either that, or he lives well beyond his means, in which case I question his judgment.
I hope that answers your question.
Matt
Probably. All the rest are.
It's pretty simple really. The man lives in a $1.5 million home. To his credit, it's paid for, which is what I'd expect from a successful lawyer and appellate judge of his age. But, he has less than $50K in the bank, no stocks, bonds, or funds and no 401K. He has 2 daughters who presumably will want college educations, and he's only 10 years away from retirement age. That doesn't sound like a man who has made responsible decisions with his money to me. So, I question his judgment both personally and professionally in those areas.
Matt
I suspect those two daughters are also in private school. Appellate court justices don't make a fortune, particularly if you're living in a very expensive real estate area. Yes, they make good money, but not great beltway money. I'm not seeing that Kavanaugh was in private practice for a long period of time, either. It's not a surprise that he is missing a large investment portfolio.
Also....he is not Scalia but he most definitely makes the court more conservative than it was. When one a lib seat comes open it will be game on and if the Republicans have an even larger majority in the Senate, which I fully expect, it will be a Scalia type which will be a donkey punch to the left for decades.
Perhaps he's a trust fund baby and doesn't have to worry about it, who knows. Like I said, it raised an eye-brow for me, but it's not a deal breaker.
Matt
Maybe the fact that he isn't rich tells us that he is an honest public servant who grew up without help of a silver spoon.
Is it possible that he values service over wealth accumulation?
In his DISSENTING opinion statement "He agreed with the Trump administration in a recent case that allowed an undocumented minor to obtain an abortion, writing in his dissent that the court created “a new right for unlawful immigrant minors in U.S. Government detention to obtain immediate abortion on demand.”"
Yes, the judgement went for the federally funded abortion of an illegal immigrant. But HIS position was a dissenting opinion.
Never knew there was a parent rule that you have to go into debt for your kids college education...
That is what the whole problem is with leftists. They don't care for rights nor laws but for the ones that they take from others and reserve for themselves.
Self serving and spoiled children.
Leftists want to use each decision/idea as the basis for the next.
That is why they hate anyone who wants to use either the Bible or the Constitution as the standard for making decisions.
Hope I didn't raise your blood pressure too much. You asked. I answered honestly.
Let's face it, financial success is a metric by which many influential people are measured. Our POTUS is perhaps the best example of that. Do you think Trump would have been elected without his many business and financial accomplishments? And don't you think that added to his credentials in some way?
Matt
The Rock
A Justice who rules based on written law and the Constitution!
What a shock!
But no shock at all that some here don't approve of that approach, knowing nothing at all about the case, the law which was in question, nor the details of the case.
They'd rather SCOTUS Justices base their decisions based upon politics and 'feelings' as long as it fits their feelings and aligns with their 'alleged' politics.
As long those Justices aren't on the left, that is. If they are on the left, then the rule of written law applies. If they aren't on the left, the rule of law does not apply.
No surprise here, what-so-ever!
Was it really in line step with interpreting the law, or was there some implicit and emotional politics involved...?
But other than that one decision, he's been a pretty good choice.
MT in MO's Link
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2018/07/10/supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-penned-healthcare-dissent-focused-on-tax/#236ba9194d6c
KPC- excellent quote
Spike- you don’t want Blind justice, you want someone to push a conservative agenda. Do you really think the Supreme Court will remain conservative forever?
Welcome back, Kyle.
If he rules on the constitution and how the law is written I say he is a win.
I still think there is a reason why Trump nominated him at this point in time. Either he felt he would get by a tight senate vote. Or if he don’t it will cause a change in some Red state democrat senators come Novembers vote. Then a more conservative judge will be nominated.
You're more of a hypocrite than I thought. We've seen you blather on about how Trump's financial accomplishments exceeds our wildest dreams many times. And how that somehow qualifies him for the most influential position in the world. Now, when someone uses that same standard on a SC nomination, suddenly it's a "new low, previously thought not to be possible.". You're pathetic, and I wouldn't hesitate to say that to your face in person.
Now run along little man. I have no use for people like you.
The Matt
AndyJ's Link
That said, the dude has had a long and successful career in one of the most lucrative professions in the US. And he's now nominated for the highest position in his profession. Wouldn't you think he'd have more to show for it at 53?
Matt
Do you honestly think the framers of our Constitution had crystal balls into the future?
Matt
I could be wrong about you but I get the impression that you think the constitution is black and white. While in some cases it could be easily applied literally, many of the cases that arrive in the Supreme Court require that the Constitution be relatively abstractly applied to determine a verdict. You sound like you want a judge that is going to see the Constitution and how it applies definitively. I’m not sure how a judge can do that without being an activist or having an agenda.
When I was a child I measured people and men by their height, but what did I know? You have persisted to reside in that same place and time in childhood and your idiotic remarks reflect that persistence. Your glaring educational shortcomings are in dire need of a severely neglected silverware's attention.
The Rock
What issues have they moved "way right" on in the last 40-50 years? Nearly every position I can think of has moved left over that time. A correction from a leftist path and getting back to what one sees as the correct path is just that, a correction, not a "move way right". Just as actively opposing leftist/socialist designs on the country is not "moving way right".
What positions do you consider "way right" that conservatives (much less republicans) have moved to recently?
I think you guys are on exactly the same page. You just express it differently.
I'd be comfortable with either one of you guarding my liberties and my God given rights.
That's refreshing, because so many of the self-proclaimed 'conservatives' here couldn't name five of the signers of the Declaration of Independence, have no idea who the primary authors of the Constitution were, and couldn't tell us five of the amendments of the Bill of Rights, let alone name even half of the other amendments.
Essentially, to paraphrase an old saying about a person's lack of knowledge, they couldn't spell the equivalant of The Declaration or the Constitution if you spotted them the C and the T.
But by God, they believe they are conservatives and how dare you challenge that!
And yet abortion was legal (up until “quickening” - when a baby was felt to move) and widely practiced at the time the Framers wrote the Constitution and the first laws outlawing abortions weren’t passed 100 years until after the ratification of the Comstitution.
A textualist interpretation of the Constitution reveals nothing about abortion. Abortion isn’t mentioned in the Constitution. Scalia, one of the strictest Justices of our time, understood this when he said “The States may, if they wish, permit abortion on demand, but the Constitution does not require them to do so.” Goes to show there is plenty of room for Constitutional interpretation, even when taking a conservative approach.
Do you realize you just agreed that there is no Constitutional right to abortion?
This is a matter for the states to decide re. the Tenth Amendment, which states:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
For the hard of hearing, this means this is an issue for each state to decide, not for the federal government.
No, it does not.
That's left for the states to decide, which they do.
Worth repeating. Thank you, Kyle.
Abortion isn't a Constitutional issue. It's a moral issue that the left and right have picked sides on.
Matt
"Right" took a fairly hard left turn with "Compassionate Conservatism" and other such drivel several years ago. Many republicans became RINOs, democrat lite. That conservatives have turned away from such failure is moving back to their foundations, still a far cry from "far right". They have barely crossed back over the center line....
The right likes foundations. Using the same scale for all. Solid bases of facts and noting results of actions, good and bad. The left seems emotionally attached to fairyland dreams of what the world should be but no idea of the impossible task to make fantasy reality. They always run out of other people's stuff first.
The left see the right moving further right because they themselves move the entire center line to the left...... thus they become that feel good "centrist" with their mobile goal posts and temporary 50 yard lines.....
Yes
WHUT?????
From John Adams to his wife about Independence Day. “The Second Day of July 1776, will be the most memorable Epocha, in the History of America. I am apt to believe that it will be celebrated, by succeeding Generations, as the great anniversary Festival. It ought to be commemorated, as the Day of Deliverance by solemn Acts of Devotion to God Almighty. It ought to be solemnized with Pomp and Parade, with Shews, Games, Sports, Guns, Bells, Bonfires and Illuminations from one End of this Continent to the other from this Time forward forever more. You will think me transported with Enthusiasm but I am not. I am well aware of the Toil and Blood and Treasure, that it will cost Us to maintain this Declaration, and support and defend these States. Yet through all the Gloom I can see the Rays of ravishing Light and Glory. I can see that the End is more than worth all the Means. And that Posterity will tryumph in that Days Transaction, even altho We should rue it, which I trust in God We shall not. “
The founders were special men. Their knowledge and foresight seams almost prophetic.
The Rock
Thank God?....Yes!... on bended knee, out stretched arms and the wails of mercy.
The Rock
