None of the names have the record or reputation of Justice Scalia. Changing the balance of the Supreme Court is in fact in jeopardy. If all the Justices had the resolve and dedication to the historical spirit of the Constitution as did Scalia. If they did….final opinions and decisions would have been quite different and America would not be angry with a branch of government.
Family of Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee Donated Only to Democrats
FreeBeacon: The family of Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama’s pick to fill the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, has donated only to Democratic campaigns.
Garland, the current Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, does not appear to have ever donated to political parties, candidates, or causes.
However, his wife and daughter have contributed only to Democrats.
Merrick married his wife, Lynn Rosenman, in 1987. In September 1992, Lynn made a $200 donation to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Services Corporation.
One month after the donation, Merrick provided assistance to Bill Clinton for a presidential debate. This information appeared on a questionnaire to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1995, the Washington Free Beaconreported Thursday.
“I provided volunteer assistance on a Presidential Debate for President Clinton in October 1992 and for Michael Dukakis in October 1988,” Garland wrote of his political activity. “I did some volunteer work for Walter Mondale’s presidential campaign in 1983-84. As a college student, I worked two summers for the campaign of my then-congressman, Abner Mikva, in 1972 and 1974.”
Merrick’s daughter, Rebecca, has also made at least one donation to a Democratic politician.
Rebecca made a $500 contribution to Elizabeth for Massachusetts, the campaign committee of Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), in December 2011.
The New York Timeswrote that if Garland is confirmed, it would result in the most liberal Supreme Court in 50 years.
Gun rights proponents have said that Garland should not be confirmed because of his record opposing gun rights as a federal judge, the Free Beaconreported Wednesday.
The Beacon also reported that Garland generally sides with labor regulators at the expense of businesses.
Juanita Duggan, president of the National Federation of Independent Business, said that her group has “great concerns” about Garland’s record of siding with government regulators.
***** Others on Obama’s short list…..donors
4 Out of 5 Obama SCOTUS Nominees Obama Donors
TruthRevolt: President Obama has whittled down his list of potential Supreme Court nominees to five — four of whom have donated to his own political campaigns.
According to the Free Beacon, the five federal judges to be interviewed for the position include:
Sri Srinivasan (who has donated $4,250 to Obama), Jane Kelly ($1,500 to Obama), Paul Watford ($1,000 to Obama), Ketanji Brown Jackson ($450 to Obama), and Merrick Garland, who has not donated to Obama.
None of the judges are major political donors and the contributions made to Obama account for the majority of each judge’s political giving. The donation from Jackson is the only federal political contribution she made that was large enough to be included in election filings.
Jackson’s donation, according to FB, can be explained by the fact that she worked as an attorney for the Obama 2008 campaign:
On her official questionnaire filed with the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee she disclosed that she “was an election poll monitor for both the primary and general elections on behalf of Lawyers for Change, Obama for America Presidential Campaign.”
Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who chairs the judiciary committee, reaffirmed the senate’s vow that none of the president’s nominees will be confirmed:
“Everybody knows any nominee submitted in the middle of this presidential campaign isn’t getting confirmed. Everybody. The White House knows it. Senate Democrats know it. Republicans know it. Even the press knows it,” Grassley said during a committee hearing on Thursday.
Still, one wonders what Obama thinks is to be gained by putting forth candidates who have financially contributed to his past campaigns.
***** Additional items from the National Law Journal:
Garland, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit since 1997 and chief judge since 2013, didn’t earn any income on top of his judicial salary in 2014, according to the most recent financial disclosure report that he filed last year. He didn’t report any outside income the previous two years.
If he’s confirmed to the Supreme Court, Garland would get a pay bump. As of 2016, federal appeals judge earned $215,400. Associates justices earned $249,300.
Related: Read Garland’s financial reports filed in 2013, 2014 and 2015
His reimbursed travel from 2012 to 2014 was limited to one or two trips annually to Harvard Law School, his alma mater, and Yale Law School. He participated in moot courts and career forums.
Garland reported no gifts, no financial agreements and no financial liabilities. He serves on the board of directors of the Historical Society of the D.C. Circuit, but he holds no other positions with nonprofits, private companies or other organizations.
Garland’s financial holdings include a mix of bank accounts, trusts, brokerage accounts and IRAs. Judges don’t report the precise value of their accounts, stocks and other assets, but instead list a range. They must report their own investments as well as those of a spouse and any dependent children, and the reports don’t specify which holdings are joint or individual.
He is also very PRO-labor: In nearly two decades on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, Judge Merrick Garland has rarely ruled against the National Labor Relations Board. But when he has overturned NLRB’s decisions, departing from his typical deference to federal agencies, he has done so to the benefit of labor unions.
The month before Scalia’s death, the high court heard arguments in Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association, a case that could decide whether public-sector employees can be required to pay union fees.
After arguments in January, the U.S. Supreme Court was seen as leaning 5-4 against labor. But Garland’s appointment to the court would likely flip the court. And if Garland has an opportunity to rule on the case, his vote could give a victory to the California Teachers Association and confidence to public-sector unions concerned that the decision could jeopardize future revenue from dues.
Denise, go check out this article on Slate. Interesting theory.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/03/merrick_garland_is_obama_s_rope_a_dope_nominee.html
Thanks, it is interesting. This is a political chess board and a condition that is never good for the county. Thanks again.