RBG MAKES A STATEMENT…A FASHION STATEMENT | Nominator-in-Chief, Mr. Donald J. Trump

November 10, 2016

Wednesday morning, JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG made the fashion statement of all fashion statements, sporting her infamous “dissent jabot” on the bench as a sure sign of protest to DONALD TRUMP’S victory in the presidential election.

In The Atlantic, Matt Ford squares away what we can expect for the Supreme Court following Tuesday’s election results, answering ten questions most critical to understanding next steps.

“The election of DONALD J. TRUMP means that JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA’S seat, vacant since he died in February, will almost certainly be filled by a conservative nominee. Back to full strength, the court will again tilt right, as it has for decades.”

Trump’s victory “also provided validation of sorts for the obstruction strategy of Senate Majority Leader MITCH MCCONNELL and other Republicans, who refused for nearly nine months to consider PRESIDENT OBAMA’S nominee to fill SCALIA’S seat, MERRICK GARLAND, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.”

“One of the biggest winners Tuesday wasn’t even on the ballot. Senate Majority Leader MITCH MCCONNELL can do a victory lap now for his success in keeping PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA from shifting the ideological balance of the Supreme Court.”

“As to whom the President-elect Trump might pick and what the process will be, we know at once a lot and a little. During the campaign, Trump issued two long list of potential nominees, put together largely by the conservative Heritage Foundation. The lists were, to a person, very conservative, but were remarkable for who was missing – some of the most distinguished conservative judges and lawyers in the country.”

“Nobody knows who MR. TRUMP will actually tap for MR. SCALIA’S empty seat. Mr. Trump himself might have little clue. In the course of his business career, the president-elect has shown a remarkable ability to dodge and parry and reverse himself on everything from the war in Iraq to immigration policy to MR. OBAMA’S birthplace. Notably, Mr. Trump never said he would choose one of the 21 people on his lists: he said the names should be viewed as a ‘guide’ he would consult when sitting down to make his selection. They are ‘representative of the kinds of principles I value,’ he said. Time will tell whether those principles make their way into an actual Trump nominee.”

Joan Biskupic for CNN notes DONALD TRUMP’S win on Tuesday was also a win for CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS. She writes, “Chief Justice John Roberts is about to get the Supreme Court back. And it could be even better for him over the next four years.”

In The Washington Post, Jonathan Adler considers what Trump’s victory means for the current Supreme Court docket and how justices will pick their cases going forward.

“In Supreme Court terms, four years is a long time.” Emily Bazelon reacts to the election of DONALD TRUMP in The New York Times and wonders how many more SCOTUS seats the 45th president will get to fill.

Noah Feldman delivers today’s top-ed titled, “U.S. Constitution is built to protect the losers.” Feldman assures opponents of DONALD TRUMP that the Constitution is here to protect them, as “JAMES MADISON’S machine of constitutional protection” kicks into high gear. He also adds that even if Trump were to replace a Supreme Court liberal lion like JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG or STEPHEN BREYER with a conservative stalwart, it’s still “extremely unlikely” that the court would roll back constitutional rights to abortion or same-sex marriage. “Despite its unpopularity, Roe has proved stunningly durable over the 43 years since it was decided. Reversing it at this point would mark the court as widely disrespectful of precedent.”

In the Los Angeles Times, Erwin Chemerinsky takes a far less positive view on the future of progressive values under a Trump-crafted court. He notes, if DONALD TRUMP nominates two justices to the Supreme Court, “abortion would quickly become illegal in about half the states.” We could also kiss affirmative action and campaign finance protections goodbye.

On his way to the White House DONALD TRUMP will have to make a teeny tiny pit stop in federal court. Only a few weeks after his election victory, Trump will make the trek out to California to face a federal jury over a lawsuit brought by former students of his now-defunct Trump University. They claim they were defrauded by a series of real estate seminars. And it looks like we’ve achieved another “first” this week, as lawyers confirm there has been no situation similar to the one now involving Trump. In other words, no president-elect has ever had to square away such allegations on the eve of his presidency.

“In addition to several suits over Trump University, Trump has threatened lawsuits against a dozen or more women who’ve accused him of sexual impropriety in recent months—and several of those women have threatened to countersue if he comes after them. There’s also a New York state investigation into his charitable foundation and a reported federal investigation into some of his advisers’ ties to Russia.” What a time to be a court watcher!

Having been elected president (didn’t you hear?!), DONALD TRUMP will likely be able to avoid testifying in lawsuits accusing him of cheating condo owners, golf-course members or vendors serving his businesses. Legal experts say these scandals are unlikely to ever escalate to anything capable of impeachment.