https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme_cour...orexp.html

Name of Justice Prior Occupations Years On Court Appointed By President:
1. William Rehnquist Asst. U.S. Attorney General 1972-2005 Nixon (Assoc., 1972),
Reagan (Chief, 1986)
2. Lewis Powell President of the American Bar Ass'n,
Private Practice 1972-1987 Nixon
3. Abe Fortas Private Practice 1965-1969 Johnson
4. Byron White Deputy U.S. Attorney General 1962-1993 Kennedy
5. Arthur Goldberg U.S. Secretary of Labor 1962-1965 Kennedy
6. Earl Warren Governor of California 1953-1969 Eisenhower
7. Tom Clark U.S. Attorney General 1949-1967 Truman
8. Harold Burton U.S. Senator 1945-1958 Truman
9. Robert Jackson U.S. Attorney General 1941-1954 F. Roosevelt
10. James Francis Byrnes U.S. Senator 1941-1942 F. Roosevelt
11. William O. Douglas Chairman of the S.E.C. 1939-1975 F. Roosevelt
12. Felix Frankfurter Asst. U.S. Attorney, Asst. Secretary of War,
Prof. of Law at Harvard 1939-1962 F. Roosevelt
13. Stanley Forman Reed U.S. Solicitor General 1938-1957 F. Roosevelt
14. Owen Josephus Roberts Special Counsel in "Teapot Dome" investigation and trials 1930-1945 Hoover
15. Harlan Fiske Stone U.S. Attorney General 1925-1946 Coolidge (Assoc., 1925),
F. Roosevelt (Chief, 1941)
16. Pierce Butler County Attorney, Private Practice 1923-1939 Harding
17. George Sutherland U.S. Senator 1922-1938 Harding
18. Louis Brandeis Private Practice 1916-1939 Wilson
19. James Clark McReynolds U.S. Attorney General 1914-1941 Wilson
20. Charles Evans Hughes Governor of New York,
U.S. Secretary of State 1910-1916,
1930-1941 Taft (Assoc., 1910),
Hoover (Chief, 1930)
21. William Henry Moody U.S. Attorney General 1906-1910 T. Roosevelt
22. George Shiras, Jr Private Practice 1892-1903 Harrison
23. Melville Fuller Private Practice 1888-1910 Cleveland
24. Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar U.S. Secretary of the Interior, U.S. Senator 1888-1893 Cleveland
25. Joseph Philo Bradley Private Practice 1870-1892 Grant
26. Salmon P. Chase U.S. Treasury Secretary 1864-1873 Lincoln
27. Samuel Freeman Miller Private Practice 1862-1890 Lincoln
28. Noah Haynes Swayne U.S. Attorney for Ohio, Ohio Legislator 1862-1881 Lincoln
29. Nathan Clifford Maine & U.S. Attorney General 1858-1881 Buchanan
30. John Archibald Campbell Alabama Legislator 1853-1861 Pierce
31. Benjamin Robbins Curtis Massachusetts Legislator 1851-1857 Fillmore
32. John McKinley U.S. Senator 1838-1852 Van Buren
33. Roger Brooke Taney Maryland & U.S. Attorney General,
U.S. Treasury Secretary 1836-1864 Jackson
34. Henry Baldwin U.S. Congressman 1830-1844 Jackson
35. Joseph Story Speaker of Mass. House of Reps., U.S. Congressman 1812-1845 Madison
36. John Marshall U.S. Secretary of State 1801-1835 Adams
37. Bushrod Washington Virginia House of Delegates,
Reporter for Virginia Court of Appeals 1799-1829 Adams
38. William Paterson Governor of New Jersey 1793-1806 Washington
39. John Jay President of the Continental Congress,
U.S. Secretary of Foreign Affairs 1789-1795 Washington
40. John Rutledge Governor of South Carolina 1789-1791, 1795 Washington

Kagan became the 41st.

Any idea that the REAL pick might leak, around, say 7pm or so ?

IMO, if Hannity gives a "sources say the pick is...." then chances are he's right.

Cause his source would probably be Trump himself....

(07-09-2018 02:21 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme_cour...orexp.html

Name of Justice Prior Occupations Years On Court Appointed By President:
1. William Rehnquist Asst. U.S. Attorney General 1972-2005 Nixon (Assoc., 1972),
Reagan (Chief, 1986)
2. Lewis Powell President of the American Bar Ass'n,
Private Practice 1972-1987 Nixon
3. Abe Fortas Private Practice 1965-1969 Johnson
4. Byron White Deputy U.S. Attorney General 1962-1993 Kennedy
5. Arthur Goldberg U.S. Secretary of Labor 1962-1965 Kennedy
6. Earl Warren Governor of California 1953-1969 Eisenhower
7. Tom Clark U.S. Attorney General 1949-1967 Truman
8. Harold Burton U.S. Senator 1945-1958 Truman
9. Robert Jackson U.S. Attorney General 1941-1954 F. Roosevelt
10. James Francis Byrnes U.S. Senator 1941-1942 F. Roosevelt
11. William O. Douglas Chairman of the S.E.C. 1939-1975 F. Roosevelt
12. Felix Frankfurter Asst. U.S. Attorney, Asst. Secretary of War,
Prof. of Law at Harvard 1939-1962 F. Roosevelt
13. Stanley Forman Reed U.S. Solicitor General 1938-1957 F. Roosevelt
14. Owen Josephus Roberts Special Counsel in "Teapot Dome" investigation and trials 1930-1945 Hoover
15. Harlan Fiske Stone U.S. Attorney General 1925-1946 Coolidge (Assoc., 1925),
F. Roosevelt (Chief, 1941)
16. Pierce Butler County Attorney, Private Practice 1923-1939 Harding
17. George Sutherland U.S. Senator 1922-1938 Harding
18. Louis Brandeis Private Practice 1916-1939 Wilson
19. James Clark McReynolds U.S. Attorney General 1914-1941 Wilson
20. Charles Evans Hughes Governor of New York,
U.S. Secretary of State 1910-1916,
1930-1941 Taft (Assoc., 1910),
Hoover (Chief, 1930)
21. William Henry Moody U.S. Attorney General 1906-1910 T. Roosevelt
22. George Shiras, Jr Private Practice 1892-1903 Harrison
23. Melville Fuller Private Practice 1888-1910 Cleveland
24. Lucius Quintus Cincinnatus Lamar U.S. Secretary of the Interior, U.S. Senator 1888-1893 Cleveland
25. Joseph Philo Bradley Private Practice 1870-1892 Grant
26. Salmon P. Chase U.S. Treasury Secretary 1864-1873 Lincoln
27. Samuel Freeman Miller Private Practice 1862-1890 Lincoln
28. Noah Haynes Swayne U.S. Attorney for Ohio, Ohio Legislator 1862-1881 Lincoln
29. Nathan Clifford Maine & U.S. Attorney General 1858-1881 Buchanan
30. John Archibald Campbell Alabama Legislator 1853-1861 Pierce
31. Benjamin Robbins Curtis Massachusetts Legislator 1851-1857 Fillmore
32. John McKinley U.S. Senator 1838-1852 Van Buren
33. Roger Brooke Taney Maryland & U.S. Attorney General,
U.S. Treasury Secretary 1836-1864 Jackson
34. Henry Baldwin U.S. Congressman 1830-1844 Jackson
35. Joseph Story Speaker of Mass. House of Reps., U.S. Congressman 1812-1845 Madison
36. John Marshall U.S. Secretary of State 1801-1835 Adams
37. Bushrod Washington Virginia House of Delegates,
Reporter for Virginia Court of Appeals 1799-1829 Adams
38. William Paterson Governor of New Jersey 1793-1806 Washington
39. John Jay President of the Continental Congress,
U.S. Secretary of Foreign Affairs 1789-1795 Washington
40. John Rutledge Governor of South Carolina 1789-1791, 1795 Washington

41. Elena Kagan, Solicitor General of the United States 2010- Obama

Well played.

Thankfully I’m a straight white guy so none of this actually will affect my life in any way.

(07-09-2018 02:24 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  Any idea that the REAL pick might leak, around, say 7pm or so ?

IMO, if Hannity gives a "sources say the pick is...." then chances are he's right.

Cause his source would probably be Trump himself....

Watch this market, it will react in real time whenever any (legitimate) leak happens. If/when someone make a huge move close to $1, that's the pick. That also goes for if there's a leak, but you don't see any real movement for that person. If that's the case, the leak is likely BS.

Side note: Ignore the comments. They are traders who will bet serious money on this stuff, and will float BS to get people to buy/sell at their whim.

https://www.predictit.org/Market/3232/Wh...rt-nominee

(07-09-2018 02:39 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:24 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  Any idea that the REAL pick might leak, around, say 7pm or so ?

IMO, if Hannity gives a "sources say the pick is...." then chances are he's right.

Cause his source would probably be Trump himself....

Watch this market, it will react in real time whenever any (legitimate) leak happens. If/when someone make a huge move close to $1, that's the pick. That also goes for if there's a leak, but you don't see any real movement for that person. If that's the case, the leak is likely BS.

Side note: Ignore the comments. They are traders who will bet serious money on this stuff, and will float BS to get people to buy/sell at their whim.

https://www.predictit.org/Market/3232/Wh...rt-nominee

You know, if I was the betting type, I would definitely throw my hat in the ring. But alas, I am like "Mush" from "A Bronx Tale". LOL. He never picked the winner....

(07-09-2018 02:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Thankfully I’m a straight white guy so none of this actually will affect my life in any way.

Until it does.

Like this, for example. Here's a verified checkmark saying Barrett is on a plane to DC, but the market isn't reacting to it, so take it with a grain of salt.

(07-09-2018 02:48 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:39 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:24 PM)thespiritof1976 Wrote:  Any idea that the REAL pick might leak, around, say 7pm or so ?

IMO, if Hannity gives a "sources say the pick is...." then chances are he's right.

Cause his source would probably be Trump himself....

Watch this market, it will react in real time whenever any (legitimate) leak happens. If/when someone make a huge move close to $1, that's the pick. That also goes for if there's a leak, but you don't see any real movement for that person. If that's the case, the leak is likely BS.

Side note: Ignore the comments. They are traders who will bet serious money on this stuff, and will float BS to get people to buy/sell at their whim.

https://www.predictit.org/Market/3232/Wh...rt-nominee

You know, if I was the betting type, I would definitely throw my hat in the ring. But alas, I am like "Mush" from "A Bronx Tale". LOL. He never picked the winner....

You can play for pennies, though I can't recommend it, because they allowed for my credit card to become compromised, so they ended up closing my account and refunding my deposit.

Max on any 1 market is $750 exposure, which means if you put $750 on something that is trading at 1 cent/share (so 75,000 shares), and it ends up being right and moving to $1, you would win $75,000! Granted, the things trading for 1 cent/share are things like Merrick Garland being President Trump's pick, lol, but still. It's not considered gambling, either, since it is technically classified as a research project of Victoria University.

Very interesting site that I use to cut through the BS of fake news and partisan spin.

(07-09-2018 02:48 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Thankfully I’m a straight white guy so none of this actually will affect my life in any way.

Until it does.

No one Trump nominates is gonna harm the straight white male demographic in any way. I already know I’ll completely disagree politically and philosophically with whoever is the nominee, but they won’t take any rights away from me. Roe and Obergefell are going to die but neither affect my life in any way. Elections have consequences and the Dems were doubly stupid by first eliminating lower court judicial filibuster and then fighting Gorsuch. They should have accepted Gorsuch since it didn’t shift the court in any way and saved the real fight for this one. What goes around comes around though and at some point the GOP is going to way overplay their hand and this will swing back.

(07-09-2018 03:01 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:48 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Thankfully I’m a straight white guy so none of this actually will affect my life in any way.

Until it does.

No one Trump nominates is gonna harm the straight white male demographic in any way. I already know I’ll completely disagree politically and philosophically with whoever is the nominee, but they won’t take any rights away from me. Roe and Obergefell are going to die but neither affect my life in any way. Elections have consequences and the Dems were doubly stupid by first eliminating lower court judicial filibuster and then fighting Gorsuch. They should have accepted Gorsuch since it didn’t shift the court in any way and saved the real fight for this one. What goes around comes around though and at some point the GOP is going to way overplay their hand and this will swing back.

I think you underestimate the impact of rulings seemingly not impactful to straight white males.

As just one overly simple example, say a female in your family gets pregnant and cannot got an abortion because of the overturning of Roe v Wade. That impacts a hell of a lot of straight white males!

(07-09-2018 03:10 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 03:01 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:48 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Thankfully I’m a straight white guy so none of this actually will affect my life in any way.

Until it does.

No one Trump nominates is gonna harm the straight white male demographic in any way. I already know I’ll completely disagree politically and philosophically with whoever is the nominee, but they won’t take any rights away from me. Roe and Obergefell are going to die but neither affect my life in any way. Elections have consequences and the Dems were doubly stupid by first eliminating lower court judicial filibuster and then fighting Gorsuch. They should have accepted Gorsuch since it didn’t shift the court in any way and saved the real fight for this one. What goes around comes around though and at some point the GOP is going to way overplay their hand and this will swing back.

I think you underestimate the impact of rulings seemingly not impactful to straight white males.

As just one overly simple example, say a female in your family gets pregnant and cannot got an abortion because of the overturning of Roe v Wade. That impacts a hell of a lot of straight white males!

Probably a whole lot of straight white male supporters of Roe vs. Wade with wage garnishments

(07-09-2018 03:10 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  I think you underestimate the power of the Force!

Sorry. I could not resist, lol.....

https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1...7918744579

BACK HOME AGAIN IN INDIANA

Go Irish!

(07-09-2018 03:10 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 03:01 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:48 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 02:32 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Thankfully I’m a straight white guy so none of this actually will affect my life in any way.

Until it does.

No one Trump nominates is gonna harm the straight white male demographic in any way. I already know I’ll completely disagree politically and philosophically with whoever is the nominee, but they won’t take any rights away from me. Roe and Obergefell are going to die but neither affect my life in any way. Elections have consequences and the Dems were doubly stupid by first eliminating lower court judicial filibuster and then fighting Gorsuch. They should have accepted Gorsuch since it didn’t shift the court in any way and saved the real fight for this one. What goes around comes around though and at some point the GOP is going to way overplay their hand and this will swing back.

I think you underestimate the impact of rulings seemingly not impactful to straight white males.

As just one overly simple example, say a female in your family gets pregnant and cannot got an abortion because of the overturning of Roe v Wade. That impacts a hell of a lot of straight white males!

I mean I don't want Roe or Obergefell overturned, and will be sad for me when it happens, but it's happening. What actually could have an affect on me personally is when they overturn Chevron Deference and an activist right wing court will have the ability to overrule nearly any executive agency action they want to.

(07-09-2018 04:49 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I mean I don't want Roe or Obergefell overturned, and will be sad for me when it happens, but it's happening. What actually could have an affect on me personally is when they overturn Chevron Deference and an activist right wing court will have the ability to overrule nearly any executive agency action they want to.

I really don't care too much, one way or the other, about Roe or Obergefell. I think society is at a point where neither one really matters any more.

But the Chevron deference standard really needs to be overturned. This country is being micromanaged by nameless, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats who don't really give a rat's ass about anything but increasing their power and the headcount of their staffs. EPA is probably the most obvious example of power run amok, but it hardly stands alone. Congress has yielded far too much power to them. They need their wings clipped and badly. I would favor changing the Administrative Procedure Act to provide:

1) all new agency-rule making is subject to congressional review before taking effect, automatically in cases where the dollar amount of the impact is greater than some threshold number, and by petition of 20% of the members of either house of congress otherwise;
2) all agencies and all of their existing regulations are subject to sunset review every ten years; and
3) administrative law judges (ALJs) who report ultimately to the executive director of the agency cannot provide the impartial tribunal required for procedural due process, and therefore either 1) follow Texas and Oregon (strange pair) in establishing a separate executive office of administrative hearings to try all disputes, or better 2) follow the European example and establish Article III administrative law courts in each federal judicial district, to have original jurisdiction over all administrative causes of action arising in their district, with appeal up through the district court in and for that district. This latter alternative would vastly reduce the power of the DC Circuit court, which is also a good thing.

Gonna take a nap so I can stay up for the whine fest.

(07-09-2018 05:25 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-09-2018 04:49 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I mean I don't want Roe or Obergefell overturned, and will be sad for me when it happens, but it's happening. What actually could have an affect on me personally is when they overturn Chevron Deference and an activist right wing court will have the ability to overrule nearly any executive agency action they want to.

I really don't care too much, one way or the other, about Roe or Obergefell.

But the Chevron deference standard really needs to be overturned. This country is being micromanaged by nameless, faceless, unaccountable bureaucrats who have way, way too much power. Congress has yielded far too much power to them. They need their wings clipped and badly. I would favor changing the Administrative Procedure Act to provide:

1) all new agency-rule making is subject to congressional review before taking effect, automatically in cases where the dollar amount of the impact is greater than some threshold number, and by petition of 20% of the members of either house of congress otherwise;
2) all agencies and all of their existing regulations are subject to sunset review every ten years; and
3) administrative law judges (ALJs) who report ultimately to the executive director of the agency cannot provide the impartial tribunal required for procedural due process, and therefore either 1) follow Texas and Oregon (strange pair) in establishing a separate executive office of administrative hearings to try all disputes, or better 2) follow the European example and establish Article III administrative law courts in each federal judicial district, to have original jurisdiction over all administrative causes of action arising in their district, with appeal up through the district court in and for that district.

All this sounds great and all, but the truth of the matter is the real reason the right now wants Chevron gone is because the courts have been pushed further and further right in the last 20 years or so. If the opposite were true and the courts were moving further and further left no way would they want all those "activist judges" to have the power to overrule any executive agency action they disagree with. This is the long game the right has been playing, and kudos to them it worked. They'll likely be able to get rid of Chevron, and then when the Dems do get back into power the activist right wing court system will be able to strike down anything and everything they want to.