For many of us who were less than enthused to see Donald Trump win the Republican nomination, the general election choice nonetheless seemed to be a clear one based on the kinds of judges the respective nominees would appoint, especially to the Supreme Court. The Trump campaign apparently wants to reinforce that point by releasing a list of possible Supreme Court appointments. Bill noted the release a few minutes ago, and Jill Colvin and Mark Sherman have this report for AP. The list is:
Steven Colloton of the Eighth Circuit (Iowa)
Allison Eid of the Colorado Supreme Court
Raymond Gruender of the Eighth Circuit (Mo.)
Thomas Hardiman of the Third Circuit (Penn.)
Raymond Kethledge of the Sixth Circuit (Mich.)
Thomas Lee of the Utah Supreme Court
Joan Larsen of the Michigan Supreme Court
William Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit (Ala.)
David Stras of the Minnesota Supreme Court
Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit (Wis.)
Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court
I am not familiar with the jurisprudence of all 11, but I do think that William Pryor would make a very fitting successor to Justice Scalia. Confirmation would be a bloody fight, but if we hold the Senate it is a fight we would win.
The larger question is whether Mr. Trump can and will pivot from the crass bluster that got him this far into a man of serious policy, capable of winning the general election and then being an effective President. Many have serious doubts, but this looks like a good start.
Steven Colloton of the Eighth Circuit (Iowa)
Allison Eid of the Colorado Supreme Court
Raymond Gruender of the Eighth Circuit (Mo.)
Thomas Hardiman of the Third Circuit (Penn.)
Raymond Kethledge of the Sixth Circuit (Mich.)
Thomas Lee of the Utah Supreme Court
Joan Larsen of the Michigan Supreme Court
William Pryor of the Eleventh Circuit (Ala.)
David Stras of the Minnesota Supreme Court
Diane Sykes of the Seventh Circuit (Wis.)
Don Willett of the Texas Supreme Court
I am not familiar with the jurisprudence of all 11, but I do think that William Pryor would make a very fitting successor to Justice Scalia. Confirmation would be a bloody fight, but if we hold the Senate it is a fight we would win.
The larger question is whether Mr. Trump can and will pivot from the crass bluster that got him this far into a man of serious policy, capable of winning the general election and then being an effective President. Many have serious doubts, but this looks like a good start.
Also encouraging is the fact that the list is not dominated by people who went to Ivy League law schools. Considering the prestige of someone's law school as a qualification may have some marginal utility when one is hiring rookies with no track record, but giving substantial weight to that factor late in a person's career is a form of discrimination that fails even the über-lenient "rational basis" test.
In the year of the outsider, "crass bluster" by a non-politician may garner more votes in the general election than "serious policy" being spouted by a career politician.