The Donald has announced that he will naming his Supreme Court nominee next week.
Time has a list of his supposed top three contenders. Of note is Thomas Hardiman:
“… Hardiman is known for protecting gun rights and taking an originalist approach to Second Amendment cases. In Drake v. Filko, which challenged a New Jersey law saying someone seeking a permit must show a “justifiable need” for a gun, Hardiman dissented against the ruling for the state. “Those who drafted and ratified the Second Amendment were undoubtedly aware that the right they were establishing carried a risk of misuse, and States have considerable latitude to regulate the exercise of the right in ways that will minimize that risk,” Hardiman wrote in his dissent. “But States may not seek to reduce the danger by curtailing the right itself.” Much of his dissent was based on the Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller, which is a landmark case on gun rights and arguably Justice Scalia’s most famous majority opinion …”
Newsweek reports 7th Circuit Justice Diane Sykes is also a finalist. On guns:
“… Judge Diane Sykes … wrote a decision striking down a Chicago gun law. The decision found several city ordinances governing shooting ranges unconstitutional, according to the official opinion released Wednesday. Among other regulations, the city banned individuals under 18 from commercial ranges, and restricted their operation to manufacturing districts. Sykes wrote the opinion striking down the regulatory regime …”
Another one is Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison Eid:
“… Among the judges he may be considering is Colorado Supreme Court Justice Allison H. Eid, who in 2012 wrote the unanimous opinion striking down a ban on licensed concealed handguns at the University of Colorado Denver. The ruling was in a lawsuit brought in 2008 by three CU Denver students seeking to have an existing gun ban lifted at the university. The ruling Eid wrote said that the state’s Concealed Carry Act allows permitted weapons to be carried “in all areas” with narrow exceptions, such as K-12 schools and courthouses, that don’t include college campuses …”
Whomever Trump ends up nominating, head clown Chuck Schumer has signaled his intent to be disruptive:
“… Schumer, who has pledged to block a doctrinaire conservative nominee, was among the senators attending an hour-long White House meeting with the president Tuesday. “I reiterated that view in our meeting today, and told him that Senate Democrats would fight any nominee that was outside of the mainstream,” said Schumer in a statement …”
To his credit, Trump isn’t shying away from a fight:
“… Trump and some Senate Republicans are now openly threatening to kill the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees — a pronouncement sure to inflame a brewing battle with Democrats over Trump’s choice to replace the late Antonin Scalia. Trump said Thursday that he would encourage Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to deploy the “nuclear option” — changing Senate rules on a majority vote — if Democrats block his Supreme Court pick. The president’s stance could amplify pressure on McConnell — a Senate institutionalist who is reluctant to further erode the chamber’s supermajority rules — to barrel through Democratic resistance by any means necessary …”
This is exactly what needs to be done. Republicans have a long history of preemptive surrender. They need to go on an all-out offensive, call B.S. on Schumer, Pelosi and company, and move court nominees and legislation through Congress over their objections.