THE STARS IS IN THE BUILDING | SCOTUS Picks Headed to Washington | Trump Plays Eeny Meeny Miny Moe
January 31, 2017
TODAY'S THE DAY, PEOPLE
|Later tonight, PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP is set to announce his Supreme Court nominee who will maybe, just maybe, return SCOTUS to a full bench for the first time in almost a year. Originally, Trump had promised his nominee would be announced on Thursday of this week, but the change in schedule came as a step that observers have said was an attempt to change the subject away from the president’s controversial immigration order.
KEEP IT 100
|The president’s now notorious press secretary, SEAN SPICER, says PRESIDENT TRUMP is 100% sure of his Supreme Court pick. So, who’s it gonna be?
EENY MEENY MINY MOE:
|“The leading contenders for the nomination are three federal appeals court judges: all very conservative, all very young, all millionaires, and all nominated to the bench by PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH.” The latest reports indicate that the nominee will be either NEIL GORSUCH or THOMAS HARDIMAN. NPR’s Nina Totenberg reports that while Gorsuch might be best categorized as a diplomatic Ivy Leaguer, Hardiman can be thought of as a “down to earth” pro-Second Amendment nominee. Keep in mind, it’s the dark horse contender, Alabama’s WILLIAM H. PRYOR, who could really cause an uproar if picked.
THE STARS IS IN THE BUILDING
|CNN’s Ariane de Vogue and Pamela Brown report the two judges considered to be the leading frontrunners—GORSUCH and HARDIMAN—are being brought to Washington today ahead of tonight’s announcement. Word has it, Gorsuch is our guy.
I'LL FOLLOW YOU INTO THE DARK
|“Whenever PRESIDENT TRUMP sensed that he was losing Republican support during the 2016 campaign, he often responded with just two words: Supreme Court.” Michael A. Memoli with the Los Angeles Times reports Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nomination serves as another major governing decision for the new president, who has yet another opportunity to show leadership of his White House and his party.
TOP-ED
|Just when we started thinking it’s up to TRUMP to determine the Supreme Court’s future, Ronald Klein in The Washington Post rolls up to tell us otherwise. He opines, “To win the real battle for the future of the high court, the nomination and the messaging around it should be aimed at the one man who truly matters: ANTHONY KENNEDY.”
ALL THAT GLITTERS IS NOT GOLD
|If the name uttered tonight if NEIL GORSUCH, that would be a big win for SCOTUS clerks. If confirmed, Gorsuch would be the fourth justice on the high court to have previously served as a Supreme Court law clerk—a record number for the court. Tony Mauro with The National Law Journal reports, “Joining CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS JR., STEPHEN BREYER and ELENA KAGAN, Gorsuch’s ascension would be another marker of the growing glitter and prestige of Supreme Court clerks.”
ED BOARD OVERTURE
|“The outrageous obstruction of MERRICK GARLAND’S nomination to the Supreme Court — the 10-month-long stonewall by Senate Republicans that not only stymied the high court’s ability to do its job but effectively stole the nomination of a new justice from PRESIDENT OBAMA — is now delivering its reward to the cynical politicians who carried it out.” The Editorial Board of the Los Angeles Times weighs in on the impending battle for SCOTUS noting, “If democracy is to work and the nation is to prosper, the political system must allow for compromise and rationality even among determined opponents.”
ED BOARD OVERTURE 2.0
|The Editorial Board of The Washington Post is advocating for cooler heads to prevail in this round of fighting over the Supreme Court, urging the SCOTUS confirmation process “needs to be protected from partisan politics to the greatest extent possible and that a scorched-earth Democratic response to any nominee, regardless of the individual merits, would simply deepen that harmful politicization.”
LAYING THE TRIPWIRE
|Is it really possible that the Senate could change forever with the removal of the centuries-old rule that gives the minority party power to block Supreme Court nominees? Amber Phillips in The Washington Post writes, “No side would be blameless in this deterioration of Senate rules and cooperation. Democrats are the ones laying the tripwire for ending the filibuster for Supreme Court picks.” She takes us through some possible outcomes concluding—to no one’s surprise, I’m sure— that no matter what, Dems are “poised to make the process as painful as possible for Republicans.”
ON THE ROAD
|Speaking yesterday at the University of Michigan, JUSTICE SONIA SOTOMAYOR told an audience of students and faculty, “When you look at the number of African-Americans at the University of Michigan — um, there’s a real problem. And why is diversity important? … For me, the answer is quite simple: It’s because until we reach equality in education, we can’t reach equality in the larger society. It starts here and ends here.”
HOMETOWN SHOWDOWN
|Paul Barrett, Bob Van Voris and David Voreacos in Bloomberg say DONALD TRUMP’S executive order on immigration banning Muslims from the country promises to be a constitutional showdown with the First Amendment at the heart of the dispute. They add, “The debate also promises to spill over into confirmation hearings for Trump’s Supreme Court nominee.”
SCOTUS REVIEWS
Why Trump should pick Hardiman for Supreme Court
The Hill“If members of the law enforcement community had a vote on who they’d like to see on the Supreme Court, they’d probably look to Judge Thomas Hardiman.”
OTHER NEWS
Gov. Cuomo calls to amend New York's constitution to protect abortion rights if Trump succeeds in overturning Roe v. Wade
Reuters“New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said on Monday he would seek to ensure that women have access to late-term abortions in the state even if conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court remove federal legal guarantees in place since the 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.”
The Supreme Court will examine partisan gerrymandering in 2017. That could change the voting map.
The Washington Post“It was supposed to be the congressional Democrats’ merger with the protest movements that had sprung up to pressure them, a rally at the Supreme Court against President Trump’s executive orders on refugees and immigration. But at times, the event looked like an awkward mass marriage, marred by bad communication.”