Robert Bork dies

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.
21 said:
What we need is a Running Law Thread.

Yea, cause that will contain much more civil discussions...

Poster 1: I really think we need to look at gun laws after the Connecticut shootings
Poster 2: **** you and the horse you rode in on you tree-hugging *******.
Mod: Thread locked
 
I guess heaven saw that Abe Fortas and Clement Haynesworth were getting bored just talking with each other.
 
Abe Vigoda survives.

Mr. Bork represents to me the unfortunate turn for the worse of Senate confirmation of judicial nominees. Although I was not a huge fan of his views, he appeared to be a qualified nominee and should have been confirmed. Instead, we got Mr. Silence who's claim to fame is he got into law school under affirmative action yet rails against it. Instead of Bork being a reminder that the confirmation process should not be politicized, the parties have sadly become even more entrenched.
 
qtlaw said:
Abe Vigoda survives.

Mr. Bork represents to me the unfortunate turn for the worse of Senate confirmation of judicial nominees. Although I was not a huge fan of his views, he appeared to be a qualified nominee and should have been confirmed. Instead, we got Mr. Silence who's claim to fame is he got into law school under affirmative action yet rails against it. Instead of Bork being a reminder that the confirmation process should not be politicized, the parties have sadly become even more entrenched.
Bork was a Reagan nominee who was ultimately replaced by Scalia, I believe -- either Scalia or Anthony Kennedy. Clarence Thomas was a Bush 41 pick some years later.
 
doctorx said:
qtlaw said:
Abe Vigoda survives.

Mr. Bork represents to me the unfortunate turn for the worse of Senate confirmation of judicial nominees. Although I was not a huge fan of his views, he appeared to be a qualified nominee and should have been confirmed. Instead, we got Mr. Silence who's claim to fame is he got into law school under affirmative action yet rails against it. Instead of Bork being a reminder that the confirmation process should not be politicized, the parties have sadly become even more entrenched.
Bork was a Reagan nominee who was ultimately replaced by Scalia, I believe -- either Scalia or Anthony Kennedy. Clarence Thomas was a Bush 41 pick some years later.

Correct.

Clarence Thomas took over the Thurgood Marshall seat. He was the first nominee in that process, and was ultimately confirmed.
 
doctorx said:
qtlaw said:
Abe Vigoda survives.

Mr. Bork represents to me the unfortunate turn for the worse of Senate confirmation of judicial nominees. Although I was not a huge fan of his views, he appeared to be a qualified nominee and should have been confirmed. Instead, we got Mr. Silence who's claim to fame is he got into law school under affirmative action yet rails against it. Instead of Bork being a reminder that the confirmation process should not be politicized, the parties have sadly become even more entrenched.
Bork was a Reagan nominee who was ultimately replaced by Scalia, I believe -- either Scalia or Anthony Kennedy. Clarence Thomas was a Bush 41 pick some years later.

Bork was replaced by Kennedy, who was the third choice. The second was, I believe, Douglas Ginsburg (sp) who stepped aside when it was revealed that he had smoked marijuana (yes, people actually used to care about that).
 
Robert Bork probably is the guy who tipped the scales forever and ensured we will never get another Supreme Court judge appointed and approved based on merits and qualifications.

It is hilarious to me how one side declares there should not be a "litmus test" for Supreme Court justices - then puts their own nominee through a series of litmus tests to make sure they will rule on law their way.

It is no longer about the law and almost 100 percent about politics.
 
zagoshe said:
Robert Bork probably is the guy who tipped the scales forever and ensured we will never get another Supreme Court judge appointed and approved based on merits and qualifications.

It is hilarious to me how one side declares there should not be a "litmus test" for Supreme Court justices - then puts their own nominee through a series of litmus tests to make sure they will rule on law their way.

It is no longer about the law and almost 100 percent about politics.

And we can thank the partisan hack Democrats who railroaded Bork for that.
 
Armchair_QB said:
And we can thank the partisan hack Democrats who railroaded Bork for that.

Yeah, pretty much, though in the years since then both sides have been pretty idiotic in this area.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top