I agree w/ Paul on this one. She's an anti-gun activist at heart and an Obama nominee so we shouldn't expect any logic or critical thinking from her when the Chicago case gets heard in front of the Supreme Court no matter his claims of her support for 'precedent'.
Yet on the other hand, she's going to replace a judge who ruled against Heller anyway so it's a zero net loss/gain for both sides.
I think she's going to get nominated. Anyone who goes against her will be called a racist and/or sexist, depending on which will get more traction.
We'll see what happens.
3 comments:
I think she's going to get nominated.
I would be absolutely astounded if she failed to get the nomination. I don't really see many Republican Senators voting against her confirmation (certainly not Maine's Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins), and I figure Democratic backing will be 100%.
I also agree with you that the net change for gun rights will be zero, or close to it.
The Republicans need to give her the "Bork Treatment".
Turnabout *is* fair-play!
Gura saw it exactly as you do--she's going to be on the court for McDonald, but she's not going to represent a change. He didn't think Souter was "gettable," so this doesn't hurt his case.
Post a Comment