• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate confirms Judge Thapar to 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals

TurtleDude

TurtleDude

warrior of the wetlands
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 12, 2005
Messages
281,619
Reaction score
100,389
Location
Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Amul Thapar confirmed by the Senate to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - Washington Times


Thursday’s 52-44 party-line vote is part of a near-universal resistance Democrats have mounted to Mr. Trump’s major nominees, both for his administration and now for the federal courts. Four Democrats didn’t cast a vote.

Trump's first circuit court pick is confirmed. This was a great pick. I have worked with Judge Thapar. He is a very bright, competent jurist, humble, the son of immigrants, and fair. It appears the opposition to him is more anti Trump than any reasonable complaint with Judge Thapar. After all, the gold standard for the Dems, the ABA, gave him its top rating.
 
TurtleDude said:
Amul Thapar confirmed by the Senate to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - Washington Times


Thursday’s 52-44 party-line vote is part of a near-universal resistance Democrats have mounted to Mr. Trump’s major nominees, both for his administration and now for the federal courts. Four Democrats didn’t cast a vote.

Trump's first circuit court pick is confirmed. This was a great pick. I have worked with Judge Thapar. He is a very bright, competent jurist, humble, the son of immigrants, and fair. It appears the opposition to him is more anti Trump than any reasonable complaint with Judge Thapar. After all, the gold standard for the Dems, the ABA, gave him its top rating.
Click to expand...

It's sad that absolutely everything is about party these days.

Political operatives shop for a favorable Circuit judge to issue an injunction of an order the opposition party wrote up. The courts seem to twist their rulings to fit a party platform rather than the law. The intelligence community has become a political tool. The IRS is a political tool. The Obama DoJ was a political entity more than it was a law enforcement entity. Commerce, agriculture, education and energy push policy based on party rather than actual results and the media has also been turned.

We are in dire, dire straits in this nation and people need to start waking up to the fact that "bipartisan" has become a serious problem. We're now dealing with either a Democrat or a Republican government. There is no longer an American government.
 
Lutherf said:
It's sad that absolutely everything is about party these days.

Political operatives shop for a favorable Circuit judge to issue an injunction of an order the opposition party wrote up. The courts seem to twist their rulings to fit a party platform rather than the law. The intelligence community has become a political tool. The IRS is a political tool. The Obama DoJ was a political entity more than it was a law enforcement entity. Commerce, agriculture, education and energy push policy based on party rather than actual results and the media has also been turned.

We are in dire, dire straits in this nation and people need to start waking up to the fact that "bipartisan" has become a serious problem. We're now dealing with either a Democrat or a Republican government. There is no longer an American government.
Click to expand...

it used to be that circuit court judges were confirmed with almost 100%. Gorsuch and Garland both were IIRC. Amul has things that Democrats claim judges should have

1) an ABA top rating

2) he's a minority-first Asian (his parents came from India) on the sixth circuit

3) He clerked for Liberal Democrat party appointed judges. first for district judge, the late Hon. S. Arthur Spiegel and then for very liberal 6th Circuit Judge, the Hon. Nathaniel Jones. (ret) when Judge Jones was on the Sixth Circuit, he was the most liberal judge on the circuit court.

4) he has taught at prestigious law schools including Vanderbilt, UVa and Georgetown as well as local law schools.

pretty strong credentials that you'd think HONEST Democrats would support
 
TurtleDude said:
it used to be that circuit court judges were confirmed with almost 100%. Gorsuch and Garland both were IIRC. Amul has things that Democrats claim judges should have

1) an ABA top rating

2) he's a minority-first Asian (his parents came from India) on the sixth circuit

3) He clerked for Liberal Democrat party appointed judges. first for district judge, the late Hon. S. Arthur Spiegel and then for very liberal 6th Circuit Judge, the Hon. Nathaniel Jones. (ret) when Judge Jones was on the Sixth Circuit, he was the most liberal judge on the circuit court.

4) he has taught at prestigious law schools including Vanderbilt, UVa and Georgetown as well as local law schools.

pretty strong credentials that you'd think HONEST Democrats would support
Click to expand...

Sure, it used to be...before Republicans started blocking all of Obama's picks for circuit court judges. Sen. Reid even had to change the senate rules so they could get confirmed.
 
Moot said:
Sure, it used to be...before Republicans started blocking all of Obama's picks for circuit court judges. Sen. Reid even had to change the senate rules so they could get confirmed.
Click to expand...

It started well before that.
 
Moot said:
Sure, it used to be...before Republicans started blocking all of Obama's picks for circuit court judges. Sen. Reid even had to change the senate rules so they could get confirmed.
Click to expand...

you need to remember what the MINORITY dems did with Miguel Estrada and Peter Keisler.

that was before Dingy Harry and the Dems started the nuclear option. No one could come up with a single valid argument for what the dems did in 01-03. Estrada had the endorsement of all three living Democratic Party former Solicitor Generals. He had worked in the Clinton SGs office. Memos from Jay Rockefeller's office (IIRC) noted that the dems should block Miguel because he was being groomed to be the first Hispanic SC justice and the Dems could not have that happen. Keisler was blocked for the fourth circuit because he was Jewish and the founder of the Federalist society. He was later not given a vote when the Dems got the control of the senate in 07 to replace CJ Roberts on the DC court.

so don't whine about what was done to the Dems.
 
TurtleDude said:
Amul Thapar confirmed by the Senate to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - Washington Times


Thursday’s 52-44 party-line vote is part of a near-universal resistance Democrats have mounted to Mr. Trump’s major nominees, both for his administration and now for the federal courts. Four Democrats didn’t cast a vote.

Trump's first circuit court pick is confirmed. This was a great pick. I have worked with Judge Thapar. He is a very bright, competent jurist, humble, the son of immigrants, and fair. It appears the opposition to him is more anti Trump than any reasonable complaint with Judge Thapar. After all, the gold standard for the Dems, the ABA, gave him its top rating.
Click to expand...

I don't really know who he is, but going by your statement I probably won't have much of a problem with this pick.
 
TheGoverness said:
I don't really know who he is, but going by your statement I probably won't have much of a problem with this pick.
Click to expand...

nobody with a brain would.
 
Both parties have played politics with judicial nominees.

The nuclear option will eventually return the Senate completely to a "majority" rules domain, which it should be.
 
fmw said:
A very partisan and incorrect opinion.
Click to expand...
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...........

(you didnt think that was serious did you?)
 
Lutherf said:
It's sad that absolutely everything is about party these days.

Political operatives shop for a favorable Circuit judge to issue an injunction of an order the opposition party wrote up. The courts seem to twist their rulings to fit a party platform rather than the law. The intelligence community has become a political tool. The IRS is a political tool. The Obama DoJ was a political entity more than it was a law enforcement entity. Commerce, agriculture, education and energy push policy based on party rather than actual results and the media has also been turned.

We are in dire, dire straits in this nation and people need to start waking up to the fact that "bipartisan" has become a serious problem. We're now dealing with either a Democrat or a Republican government. There is no longer an American government.
Click to expand...

That's why I throw my support behind anyone that says they want to shrink the government.
 
TurtleDude said:
you need to remember what the MINORITY dems did with Miguel Estrada and Peter Keisler.

that was before Dingy Harry and the Dems started the nuclear option. No one could come up with a single valid argument for what the dems did in 01-03. Estrada had the endorsement of all three living Democratic Party former Solicitor Generals. He had worked in the Clinton SGs office. Memos from Jay Rockefeller's office (IIRC) noted that the dems should block Miguel because he was being groomed to be the first Hispanic SC justice and the Dems could not have that happen. Keisler was blocked for the fourth circuit because he was Jewish and the founder of the Federalist society. He was later not given a vote when the Dems got the control of the senate in 07 to replace CJ Roberts on the DC court.

so don't whine about what was done to the Dems.
Click to expand...

"Founder of the Federalist Society" and you wonder why they blocked him? LOL
 
TurtleDude said:
it used to be that circuit court judges were confirmed with almost 100%. Gorsuch and Garland both were IIRC. Amul has things that Democrats claim judges should have

1) an ABA top rating

2) he's a minority-first Asian (his parents came from India) on the sixth circuit

3) He clerked for Liberal Democrat party appointed judges. first for district judge, the late Hon. S. Arthur Spiegel and then for very liberal 6th Circuit Judge, the Hon. Nathaniel Jones. (ret) when Judge Jones was on the Sixth Circuit, he was the most liberal judge on the circuit court.

4) he has taught at prestigious law schools including Vanderbilt, UVa and Georgetown as well as local law schools.

pretty strong credentials that you'd think HONEST Democrats would support
Click to expand...

I thought that about Garland. And, of course, Republicans are all about giving an honest up-or-down vote on a judicial nominee. That's why they had to nuke the filibuster. Man, I can't seem to remember the vote totals on Garland's nomination, though. Must be gettin' old.
 
JamesBY said:
Both parties have played politics with judicial nominees.

The nuclear option will eventually return the Senate completely to a "majority" rules domain, which it should be.
Click to expand...

Good point - there are very few things stated in the constitution which require anything else.
 
Deuce said:
I thought that about Garland. And, of course, Republicans are all about giving an honest up-or-down vote on a judicial nominee. That's why they had to nuke the filibuster. Man, I can't seem to remember the vote totals on Garland's nomination, though. Must be gettin' old.
Click to expand...

after what the minority party dems did to Estrada and Keisler, nothing will be too dirty for payback by the GOP. I am glad Garland got denied. He's a gun banner and any, I repeat ANY judge who pretends the second isn't about a individual right should not be on any court
 
Moot said:
"Founder of the Federalist Society" and you wonder why they blocked him? LOL
Click to expand...

abortion rights activist didn't get Ruth Bader Ginsburg denied. Why should being a founder of the federalist society be grounds to ban anyone? as I said, after Estrada and Keisler, I hope Gorsuch ends up being by far the MOST MODERATE jurist Trump appoints.
 
TurtleDude said:
after what the minority party dems did to Estrada and Keisler, nothing will be too dirty for payback by the GOP. I am glad Garland got denied. He's a gun banner and any, I repeat ANY judge who pretends the second isn't about a individual right should not be on any court
Click to expand...

Did the GOP not know any of that when they overwhelmingly approved him?
 
TurtleDude said:
Amul Thapar confirmed by the Senate to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals - Washington Times


Thursday’s 52-44 party-line vote is part of a near-universal resistance Democrats have mounted to Mr. Trump’s major nominees, both for his administration and now for the federal courts. Four Democrats didn’t cast a vote.

Trump's first circuit court pick is confirmed. This was a great pick. I have worked with Judge Thapar. He is a very bright, competent jurist, humble, the son of immigrants, and fair. It appears the opposition to him is more anti Trump than any reasonable complaint with Judge Thapar. After all, the gold standard for the Dems, the ABA, gave him its top rating.
Click to expand...

I am sure he is a qualified pick, but why do you think the seat was vacant since 2013?
 
TurtleDude said:
abortion rights activist didn't get Ruth Bader Ginsburg denied. Why should being a founder of the federalist society be grounds to ban anyone? as I said, after Estrada and Keisler, I hope Gorsuch ends up being by far the MOST MODERATE jurist Trump appoints.
Click to expand...
Good point in your conclusion, because I think Gorsuch will out Roberts Roberts. He is not re-incarnation of Scalia.
 
JamesBY said:
Good point in your conclusion, because I think Gorsuch will out Roberts Roberts. He is not re-incarnation of Scalia.
Click to expand...

yeah I am hoping for Kennedy, breyer and Ginsburg and if we are really lucky, Sotomayor to be replaced by jurists who have the same views on the second amendment as Justice Clarence Thomas
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom