Hubwonk Host Joe Selvaggi talks with Cato Institute’s Ilya Shapiro about his new book, Supreme Disorder: Judicial Nominations and the Politics of America’s Highest Court. The episode equips listeners with historical context to better understand the makeup of the Court, the nomination process, and the impact of a new justice on the Court.

Guest:

Join Jim and Greg as they cheer President Trump’s selection of Judge Amy Coney Barrett for the U.S. Supreme Court. They also dig into the New York Times story on Trump’s taxes and discuss what might be damaging and what’s just noise. And they discuss the spectrum of attacks Democrats and their media allies are aiming at Judge Barrett – from Obamacare scares to bashing her for being a working mom to why adopting kids from Haiti is somehow troubling.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. I Will Pray for Her, But I Will Not Mourn for Ruth Bader Ginsburg

 

As I woke up Friday morning, I turned on Fox News only to see Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s casket being carried up the steps of the Capitol, there to lie in state for the next few days. The Fox anchor was droning on about the “iconic” justice who, I was told, was a person of great importance. So have things gone in the few days since Ginsburg shuffled off this mortal coil. One could be forgiven for thinking some great saint rested in that oblong box. But no, the “saint” is better described as a princess of darkest who was responsible for the murder of millions of babies resting innocently in their mother’s womb.

To put it in the starkest reality, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a stone-cold killer. There is exactly nothing in Ginsburg’s legal career that qualifies her for the moniker “iconic.” “Butcher” is more precise. Along with her allies, Ginsburg pushed the unlimited expansion of abortion, marking her as one of the most enthusiastic mass murderers of the truly defenseless. And I will be damned if I going to mourn her death or shower her with accolades.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. The Dogma Lives Loudly Within Me

 

And, if I don’t much flatter myself, it doesn’t stop me from being a clearer thinker than your average Senate Democrat.

One thing my dogma tells me is that there are a lot of sins we humans do that are none of the government’s business to stop–gossip, lust, laziness, gluttony, not praying enough, not following the Golden Rule, and the list goes on.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Trump Nominates Amy Coney Barrett to the US Supreme Court

 

At a Saturday Rose Garden ceremony, President Donald Trump officially nominated Amy Coney Barrett to serve on the US Supreme Court. Barrett, 48, currently serves as a judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit and as a law professor at Notre Dame University. From 1998 to 1999, she clerked for Justice Antonin Scalia.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Quote of the Day: Obama in 2016 on a SCOTUS Nominee in an Election Year

 

2016 Obama:

When there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, the President is to nominate someone, the Senate is to consider that nomination, and either they disapprove of that nominee, or that nominee is elevated to the Supreme Court. . . . There’s no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That’s not in the Constitutional text.

In a show we could just as easily have named “David Limbaugh Cuts Through The Static,” the acclaimed NYT Best Selling author, pundit, and brother of Rush Limbaugh sits down with our own Dave Carter for a running stream of analysis that both figuratively and literally cuts through the static. That’s because the interview ran into a technical snag that resulted in actual static in the audio recording! Remarkably enough, Mr. Limbaugh’s clear analysis and commentary rises above the static (owing perhaps to his passion and conviction), so that the audio distortion will not prevent you from hearing what he has to say. And what he has to say needs to heard as a ringing indictment not only of the cancel culture and the left’s mob mentality, but of those on the right whose vacillations have helped bring us to this point.

Then Ricochet’s own Henry Racette stops by to discuss his recent article, “About That Vacancy,” and how he sees the 2020 Presidential election shaping up. This episode is rich in analysis, technical glitches notwithstanding, and we think you’ll enjoy the conversations.

“Judge of the Decade”, the Honorable Michael Warren (6th Circuit Court, Oakland County, MI) Author & Co-Creator of the Patriot Week Foundation https://www.patriotweek.org/ discusses the contentious and history-making Trump nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States. From a Constitutional perspective, can Democrats go through with their threats to “pack the court”? How and when did SCOTUS become so politicized? If Trump wins reelection, will a second term see a 7-2 Conservative court and how would that impact the country?

Join Jim and Greg as they enjoy the fun ad for GOP congressional hopefuls in Texas, an ad starring Rep. Dan Crenshaw and includes skydiving and multiple movie references. They also fume over the latest revelations proving the FBI knew the Steele dossier was based on a likely Russian spy and still sought FISA warrants without ever revealing the source to the FISA court. And they get a kick out Democrats suddenly wanting Supreme Court term limits since we may soon have an actual conservative majority.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Beware the COVID Lawsuits

 

The COVID pandemic is a dream come true for trial lawyers. Although many Americans have already suffered severe economic harm, the plaintiffs’ lawyers see near-guaranteed rewards arriving soon from high numbers of deaths, changing protocols developed in a climate of medical uncertainty and bought politicians committed to preserving their right to file baseless suits.

Healthcare workers have done their best to stem this pandemic under stressful conditions. But in a profession usually guided by meticulously researched, double-blind studies, doctors have been forced into unknown territory.

Join Jim and Greg as they expose yet another day of Joe Biden not being able to appear in public the day after holding events, strongly suggesting he’s not up to the rigors of the campaign trail or the presidency. They also blast the violence perpetrated in Louisville and other cities in the wake of no police officers being charged for murder in the Breonna Taylor case. They also find it unacceptable that there is no bodycam evidence of the entry into the apartment or of the shooting. And they react to the case of arson at the Minnesota home of a Trump supporter and the graffiti left behind noting support for Biden, BLM, and more.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Amy Coney Barrett: A View from Rhodes College

 

President Trump is going to announce his nomination for the Supreme Court later this week, and all the talk is about Amy Coney Barrett, currently a Notre Dame professor of law and a judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. As it happens, Amy was a classmate of mine at Rhodes College, a small (1,400 students at the time) liberal-arts school in Memphis. I didn’t know her well, but she was a friend of other friends, and we were acquainted a bit through being in a club together.

I can tell you a few things about her, though. For one thing, she did not have a wild reputation, so I think that if she’s nominated, the Senate hearings will have to find something else to complain about. She was an English major and served on the Honor Council, a student body that enforced our honor code against lying and cheating (a great feature of academics at Rhodes that allowed us take-home tests in many classes). We were both in Mortar Board, an honor society. She wasn’t a political activist and was never a member of the College Republicans (I was, and we had a much larger membership than the College Democrats).

Member Post

 

Republicans really need to push back hard against the nonsense that both sides do the same thing when it comes to the workings of the Supreme Court. One side reads the Constitution’s text based on its meaning at the time of its adoption and the other believes its meaning changes and evolves, coincidentally only in […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

Join Jim and Greg as they welcome Sen. Dianne Feinstein – the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee – saying she opposes ending the legislative filibuster. Without killing the filibuster, Democrats would be unable to add seats to the Supreme Court, but is Feinstein sincere or is she just worried about touting court packing before the election? They also brace for a violent day or more in Louisville as officials announce whether police officers will face charges for the shooting death of Breonna Taylor in March. And they unload on media outlets for not only beginning to attack possible Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett but for getting the story spectacularly wrong.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. Democrats and the Constitution: I do not think it means what they think it means…

 

The Constitutional procedure for filling a vacancy in the Supreme Court is quite simple: The President has the right to pick a nominee. He doesn’t have to, and he can pick anyone that he wants. The nominee may not serve unless confirmed by the Senate (with a recess appointment exception, I think, not applicable here). There is nothing in the Constitution that says that the Senate has to confirm, or even that the Senate has to vote.

As such, the President has unfettered discretion to nominate a prospective Justice, and the Senate has unfettered discretion to approve, or not.

Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. The Forgotten Judge

 

The time to speculate on Supreme Court nominations is obviously upon us. Mindful of the diversity calculations in replacing Ruth Ginsburg, President Trump has indicated that he will appoint a woman to the Court. Amy Coney Barrett, two years on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (48 years of age) and Barbara Logoa, with considerable experience in Florida but less than one year on the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals (53 years of age), are the acknowledged front-runners. While their intelligence is not in doubt, there is a clear lack of a meaningful track record in adjudicating federal cases in both instances. Unfortunately, there also are questions of whether relatively youthful, somewhat inexperienced judges will survive the Greenhouse Effect.

Join Jim and Greg as they react to 51 Senate Republicans announcing they will support the process of confirming a Supreme Court nominee before Election Day. They also hammer Dems from the Obama and Clinton teams for insisting that Democrats adding seats to the high court is the only response to the supposed constitutional crisis spawned by a vacancy near an election. And they crush Joe Biden for refusing to say whether he supports court packing.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Filling the SCOTUS Seat Isn’t an Option, It’s an Obligation

 

With Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death and a newly vacant Supreme Court seat, the political madness of 2020 got even madder. But this moment is precisely why so many Republicans voted for Donald Trump despite their misgivings. A conservative majority on SCOTUS has been a signature goal of the party base going back to Ronald Reagan’s presidency. Now, 40 years later, the opportunity is finally here.

To quote Margaret Thatcher, this is no time to go wobbly. As expected, many are.

Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Trump and McConnell, Beware

 

I first met Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the winter of 1978 when we were both fellows at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford. Our interactions were always cordial. From the first time we talked, it was clear that she was a passionate advocate first, and a detached academic second. She was always immersed in filing certiorari petitions at the Supreme Court in connection with the hugely successful Women’s Rights Project, which she ran at the American Civil Liberties Union from 1972 until she was appointed to the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1980.

Ginsburg had the rare quality of being both passionate and rigorous in her work, and she displayed those same traits of grit and excellence at every stage of her career. Moreover, her excellence as a lawyer was not confined to the women’s rights issues that brought her fame. She also displayed an impressive expertise on the many procedural, jurisdictional, and constitutional issues that form a huge part of the high court’s docket. It was surely possible to disagree with her on the merits of any given case, as I often did. But it was not possible to dispute the brilliance, knowledge, and determination that she brought to her lifetime’s work.

Join Jim and Greg as they reflect on the passing of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg as well as President Trump’s reaction to the news. They also wade into the battle over whether Trump and Senate Republicans ought to press forward with a confirmation process before Election Day and counter Democrats’ insistence that doing so would somehow be unconstitutional. And they respond to the absurd overreactions of people like Barack Obama and Reza Aslan to the prospect of a new justice this year.