Trump releases list of 11 potential SCOTUS nominees

Are your fears allayed?

, --May 18, 2016

American Politics, News | Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us


No one says President Trump has to follow through on what candidate Trump promised, of course, but that's true of every candidate in every cycle. People want specifics from Trump. People complain that the Supreme Court is no argument in favor of Trump because no one has any idea what type of Justice he might appoint. OK. Here you go:
Top picks include conservative federal and state judges like Steven Colloton of Iowa, Allison Eid of Colorado and Raymond Gruender of Missouri. Also on the list are: Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania, Raymond Kethledge of Michigan, Joan Larsen of Michigan, Thomas Lee of Utah, William Pryor of Alabama, David Stras of Minnesota, Diane Sykes of Wisconsin and Don Willett of Texas. Trump had previously named Pryor and Sykes as examples of kind of justices he would choose. The news comes as Trump is working to bring together a fractured Republican Party and earn the trust of still-skeptical establishment Republicans who question his electability in the general election, as well as conservatives in his party still wary of his commitment to their cause. In a statement, Trump said the list "is representative of the kind of constitutional principles I value" and said that, as president, he would use it "as a guide to nominate our next United States Supreme Court Justices." His campaign stressed the list was compiled "first and foremost, based on constitutional principles, with input from highly respected conservatives and Republican Party leadership."
I'm not going to pretend to be an avid watcher of the nation's courts. I'm not. Presumably these are all judges with at least somewhat conservative records, but I'm sure you'll tell me if they're not. But let me ask you this: Assuming this really is a list of solid conservative judges who would make worthy successors to Antonin Scalia, what does the release of this list do to your thinking when I remind you that - assuming Mitch McConnell doesn't cave and allow the confirmation of Merrick Garland - the next president is going to determine whether the SCOTUS has a liberal or conservative majority? And you know perfectly well which direction it will swing if Hillary is president. You tell me: If you weren't sure there was enough of a difference between Trump and Hillary to get you to vote for Trump, does this do it? And why or why not?

View Comments
Dan Calabrese——

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain

Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.