Poll Americans say Trump should wait to nominate Ginsburg replacement

Americans say by a 13-point margin that President Donald Trump should allow the winner of the presidential election to nominate a replacement for the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a new HuffPost/YouGov poll finds.

Roughly half, 49%, say Trump should wait so that whoever wins the election can nominate Ginsburg’s replacement. Another 36% say he should immediately nominate a replacement. They say, 44% to 37%, that presidents in the final year of their term should generally wait until after the election to handle any Supreme Court vacancies.

Views are deeply divided along partisan lines. Democrats say by a 70-point margin that Trump should allow the election’s winner to nominate a replacement, while Republicans say by a 54-point margin that Trump should announce his nominee immediately. 

Ruth Bader Ginsburg during a confirmation hearing for the US supreme court in Washington in 1993. Americans are split in their confidence that Trump has the ability to choose good nominees for the Supreme Court: 44% say they’re at least somewhat confident, 44% that they’re not very or not at all confident, and the rest that they’re not sure.

Polling on a rapidly developing political event faces the inherent challenge of trying to capture a moving target ― opinions are liable either to shift or to further solidify as both parties stake out positions and make their arguments to the public. Trump said he would announce a nominee on Saturday, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) quickly followed the announcement of Ginsburg’s death with the promise that Trump’s nominee would “receive a vote on the floor” of the Republican-majority Senate.

Democratic lawmakers and Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden have strenuously objected, pointing to the GOP’s decision to block a vote on Obama-era Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland months ahead of the 2016 election.

After reading that Republicans prevented Garland from receiving a hearing, Americans were relatively divided on what the Senate should do today. Forty percent said that, if Trump announces a nominee before the el

Read more: http://electionnewschannel.com/top-news/152633-poll-americans-say-trump-should-wait-to-nominate-ginsburg-replacement

How A Supreme Court Vacancy Could Spell The End Of Legal Abortion

A legal scholar on the fate of Roe v. Wade after the death of liberal giant Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

For almost 30 years on the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a vocal defender of abortion rights, framing the question of reproductive choice as one of gender equality. “This is something central to a woman’s life, to her dignity,” she said at her 1993 confirmation hearing. “When government controls that decision for her, she’s being treated as less than a fully adult human responsible for her own choices.” 

That position guided her voting record up to her last reproductive rights case, which she participated in from her hospital bed in May. She used her voice, while weak, to castigate the Trump administration for undermining comprehensive birth control coverage. 

Ginsburg’s reliable liberal vote on abortion rights is now gone. In her absence, Roe v. Wade, the landmark Supreme Court decision that established a constitutional right to abortion, is expected to be contested. The future of legal abortion in the U.S. is facing its greatest threat in decades. 

HuffPost spoke with Mary Ziegler, a professor at Florida State University and author of “Abortion and the Law in America: Roe v. Wade to the Present,” about the looming confirmation battle to replace Ginsburg and what might come next.

What do you expect to happen to abortion rights if a new conservative justice is confirmed? 

It depends who the nominee is. The two front-runners at the moment are Barbara Lagoa of the 11th circuit and Amy Coney Barrett. Lagoa doesn’t have as long of a record on abortion, which may make her the less likely choice. She could alienate social conservatives who share Sen. Josh Hawley’s angst. [Note: The Missouri lawmaker said in June that he would only vote to confirm Supreme Court nominees who say Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided.] Barrett, by contrast, would be expected to be a vote against Roe. She has been more openly pro-life than most current members of the court, including the conservative members, so we have reason to think that she’s skeptical of Roe. 

The question is, what would adding someone like her mean in terms of the balance of th

Read more: http://electionnewschannel.com/top-news/152616-how-a-supreme-court-vacancy-could-spell-the-end-of-legal-abortion

For Republicans The Real Question Is Why Wouldn’t They Fill That Supreme Court Seat

Putting young, pre-vetted conservatives on the federal bench was an explicit part of the quid pro quo they made with Trump in May 2016.

As Democrats demand explanations on how Republicans can push forward with a Supreme Court nomination with the election just weeks away, Republicans have a different question: Why wouldn’t they?

Republicans generally and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in particular made filling the federal judiciary with as many conservative judges as possible a priority years ago. They even made then-candidate Donald Trump agree to this as a condition of their support in 2016.

Today, with Trump in danger of losing reelection in six weeks and Republicans in danger of losing their Senate majority, many in the party see this as a now-or-possibly-never opportunity.

“They could have this very good thing if they act now. If they wait, they may not. So, act now,” said Amanda Carpenter, once a top aide to Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas).

Terry Sullivan, a GOP consultant who ran Sen. Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign, said that focusing on the high court also takes the attention off of other things. “My sense is that every smart political operative knows that if this election is about coronavirus or Trump, Republicans will lose big. And the absolute best way to change the narrative and distract the media and liberals is make it about this.”

Beyond the obvious benefits of moving quickly is the danger that even if Trump were to win on Nov. 3, the fact that he would never again need Republican support or face the voters could make him an uncontrollable wild card.

“The Republican Party has to confirm this judge now…. If Trump wins reelection, all his appointments to the courts, the Cabinet or otherwise will adhere to the Bill Barr loyalty standard,” said Rick Tyler, who worked on Cruz’s 2016 presidential bid. He added that he wouldn’t put it past Trump to nominate his own daughter. “Why not put a true loyalist on the court? Actually, Ivanka would be the perfect pick.”

Installing young judges, pre-screened and pre-approved by the conservative Federalist Society, has been common ground between social conservatives who want to see abortion rights overturned and the business community that wants to limit the government’s ability to impose safety and environmental regulat

Read more: http://electionnewschannel.com/top-news/152615-for-republicans-the-real-question-is-why-wouldn-t-they-fill-that-supreme-court-seat

Biden Anti-Business Agenda Would Wreck the Economy

The Democrats are rewriting history, celebrating the Obama record on the economy as if these were the salad days for America. In Washington parlance, that is called "misremembering." The reality is that the Obama tax-and-regulate agenda led to the weakest economic recovery from a recession since the Great Depression.

This week, the Census Bureau released its economic report -- the gold standard of measuring the finances of American families.

In President Donald Trump's first three years in office, real median family income for Americans rose by more than $6,400. In Obama's EIGHT years in office, the increase in incomes was closer to $4,000. Black Americans made more income gains in three years under Trump than eight years under Obama.

But Biden's agenda is to return to a regulation binge -- in banking, finance, environment, consumer affairs and health care.

The rumors are swirling that Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a leading Biden economic policy adviser and confidant, could be Treasury secretary or regulatory czar.

The radical Warren policy proposals that Biden has now adopted, including entirely carbon emission-free electricity (with a loss of up to 5 million blue-collar jobs) and the strictest financial regulations ever. Stocks and retirement portfolios could take a beating.

For example, Warren and many Biden economists are advocating adding to the Fed's current dual mandate of promoting stable prices and maximum employment. Now they want a mandate that will use the Fed monetary policy to equalize incomes. How? By printing money? Forcing companies to pay a super minimum wage?

Retirement savings of American mom-and-pop investors and financial traders of all shapes and sizes could be at risk if independent analyses of credit rating agencies are compromised by government mandates. The Biden Democrats want the feds to intervene in these bond ratings to promote social justice, environmentalism and other goals that may be worthy but that steer retirement and other investment funds away from the highest returns.

Trump wants health care freedom that gives patients and doctors more say of what kind of insurance they can buy and what kind of procedures are best for them. Biden wants to double down on the Affordable Care Act, which has driven up health costs and prohibited Americans from

Read more: http://electionnewschannel.com/top-news/152517-biden-anti-business-agenda-would-wreck-the-economy

Page 1 of 5

National Weather

 Click on map for forecast

advertisement

advertisement