SCOTUS UPHOLDS TRUMP'S TRAVEL BAN ON SEVERAL MUSLIM COUNTRIES (GORUSH)

SCOTUS UPHOLDS TRUMP'S TRAVEL BAN ON SEVERAL MUSLIM COUNTRIES (GORUSH):

IRAN
LIBYA
SYRIA
YEMEN
SOMALIA
CHAD
NORTH KOREA
VENEZUELA

NEIL GORUSH BALANCES SCOTUS & RULES AS SCALIA MAY HAVE.

DEMOCRATS STOP WAITING FOR TRUMP'S IMPEACHMENT OR TRYING TO ENCOURAGE AN ASSASSINATION.

INSTEAD KEY DEMS SHOULD BE STRATEGIZING TO WIN IN 2018 OR 2020.


Sources: BBC, CTV News, NY Times, TIME, Youtube


***** Supreme Court allows Trump travel ban to take full effect


The US Supreme Court has ruled President Donald Trump's travel ban on six mainly Muslim countries can go fully into effect.

But the directive against travellers from Chad, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen still faces legal challenges.

On Monday, seven of the nine justices lifted injunctions imposed by lower courts on the policy.

The ruling covers the third version of the directive that President Trump has issued since taking office.

The presidential proclamation also imposed restrictions on travellers from North Korea and some Venezuelan government officials, which have gone into effect.

In striking down the other parts, lower court judges had cited Mr Trump's campaign description of his policy as a "Muslim ban".

Further arguments will be heard this week by federal courts in San Francisco, California, and Richmond, Virginia.

In June, the Supreme Court allowed an earlier version of the policy to take partial effect.

The president's travel bans have each been frustrated by the courts to some degree:

In January, he signed an order banning people from seven Muslim-majority countries and suspending all refugee entry. The measure prompted protests and legal challenges across dozens of states
A revised version in March exempted green card holders and dual citizens. By June, the Supreme Court allowed most of it to go into effect, a including 120-day ban on all refugees entering the US, but granted a wide exemption for those with a "bona fide connection" to the US
President Trump's third order was announced in late September. It added non-Muslim-majority nations North Korea and Venezuela, provisions which lower courts have allowed to proceed
What have lower courts said?

In striking down the other parts, federal judges have cited Mr Trump's campaign description of his policy as a "Muslim ban".

Lower courts have also found the policy violated the first amendment of the US constitution covering freedom of religion.

In October, a Maryland federal judge said: "The 'initial' announcement of the Muslim ban, offered repeatedly and explicitly through President Trump's own statements, forcefully and persuasively expressed his purpose in unequivocal terms."

A federal judge in Hawaii said the administration "lacks sufficient findings that the entry of more than 150 million nationals from six specified countries would be 'detrimental to the interests of the United States'".

A court in Virginia ruled: "The illogic of the government's contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed," the court ruling said, pointing out that the countries' populations were between 90% and 99% Muslim.

GORSUCH REPLACES SCALIA; BALANCES SCOTUS (CONGRATS)

GORSUCH REPLACES SCALIA; BALANCES SCOTUS:

FULL CONSERVATIVE POWER RETURNS TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

CONGRATS


Sources: Los Angeles Times, The White House, YouTube


***** Gorsuch thanks Trump as he takes oath as Supreme Court justice


Supreme Court Justice Neil M. Gorsuch went to the White House on Monday to take a second oath and to publicly thank President Trump, Vice President Mike Pence, the lawyers in the White House counsel’s office, and Republican Senate leaders for helping put him on the nation’s highest court.

“This process has reminded me of how outrageously blessed I am,” Gorsuch said in the Rose Garden ceremony.

There has been some controversy in the past decade over whether it was appropriate for a newly confirmed justice to be sworn in at the White House. Retired Justice John Paul Stevens said such ceremonies give the appearance the new justice is going to the court as the president’s appointee rather than an independent justice.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan took their oaths at the Supreme Court and did not go the White House for a public ceremony. When they had a ceremonial investiture in the courtroom, President Obama attended. But in prior decades, the newly confirmed justices routinely went to the White House to take the oath alongside the president.

Rose Garden ceremony, the president said he was proud and pleased to have chosen an outstanding jurist to replace to the late Justice Antonin Scalia. “I got it done in the first 100 days!” he said.

“This is a very, very special moment,” Trump told Gorsuch as he was about take the oath. “I have no doubt you will go down as one of the truly great justices in the history of the United States Supreme Court.”

Gorsuch won his seat after an unusually partisan battle. Senate Republicans, led by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), refused to consider Judge Merrick Garland, President Obama's nominee, and they were forced to change the filibuster rule to confirm Trump's nominee after Democrats sought to block a vote on Gorsuch.

Earlier Monday morning, Gorsuch took the constitutional oath in a private ceremony at the Supreme Court. He then went to the White House to take a second “judicial oath” in a public ceremony.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts and the other seven associate justices were in attendance at the Rose Garden ceremony, and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy administered the oath to Gorsuch, who served as his law clerk in the 1993-94 term.

Gorsuch will soon be hearing and deciding cases involving the Trump administration, including possibly whether to uphold the president’s temporary travel ban on people from six majority-Muslim nations. Two federal judges decided to put the ban on hold, and lawyers for the administration are appealing.

Trump used the ceremony to tout the changes he has brought to Washington. “We are in a process of reviewing and renewing, and also rebuilding, our country. A new optimism is sweeping across our land, and a new faith in America is filling our hearts and lifting our sights,” he declared.

The president also praised Justice Kennedy as “a man of outstanding accomplishment. Throughout his nearly 30 years on the Supreme Court, [he] has been praised by all for his dedicated and dignified service. We owe him an enormous debt of gratitude, and I am honored that he is with us today.”

Kennedy, 80, is now the longest serving justice. And though a Republican appointee, he has been somewhat of a disappointment to conservatives. Last year, he joined with the court’s liberals to strike strict abortion clinic regulations from Texas, and the year before, he wrote the landmark decision making same-sex marriage a constitutional right.

If Kennedy were to retire in the next few years, it would give the president and Senate Republicans the opportunity to give conservatives firm control of the court. As if to reassure Kennedy, Trump’s lawyers have mentioned several of his former law clerks as strong candidates for the next Supreme Court nomination.

IMMIGRATION AMNESTY POLICY BLOCKED BY SCOTUS 4-4 (SCALIA'S ABSENCE)

IMMIGRATION AMNESTY POLICY BLOCKED BY SCOTUS 4-4 (SCALIA'S ABSENCE):

ISIL HAS RUINED ANY CHANCE FOR IMMIGRATION AMNESTY IN THE UNITED STATES.

Sources:  NY Times, CNN,  NBC News, WSJ, Youtube

****** Supreme Court Deadlocks on Obama Immigration Plan. It Remains Blocked.

The Supreme Court on Thursday announced that it had deadlocked in a case challenging President Obama’s plan to shield millions of immigrants from deportation and allow them to work. 

The 4-4 tie left in place an appeals court ruling blocking the plan, dealing a sharp blow to an ambitious program that Mr. Obama had hoped would become one of his central legacies. 

Instead, even as the court deadlocked, it amplified the already contentious election-year debate over the nation’s immigration policy and presidential power.

The case, United States v. Texas, No. 15-674, concerned a plan to allow as many as five million unauthorized immigrants who are the parents of citizens or of lawful permanent residents to apply for a program that would spare them from deportation and provide them with work permits. 

The program was called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents, or DAPA.

Mr. Obama has said he took action in 2014 after years of frustration with Republicans in Congress who had repeatedly refused to support bipartisan Senate legislation to update immigration laws. 

A coalition of 26 states, led by Texas, promptly challenged the plan, accusing the president of ignoring administrative procedures for changing rules and of abusing the power of his office by circumventing Congress.

In February 2015, Judge Andrew S. Hanen of Federal District Court in Brownsville, Tex., entered a preliminary injunction shutting down the program while the legal case proceeded. 

The government appealed, and a divided three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans affirmed the injunction.

In their Supreme Court briefs, the states acknowledged that the president had wide authority over immigration matters, telling the justices that “the executive does have enforcement discretion to forbear from removing aliens on an individual basis.”

 Their quarrel, they said, was with what they called a blanket grant of “lawful presence” to millions of immigrants, entitling them to various benefits.

In response, Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. told the justices that this “lawful presence” was merely what had always followed from the executive branch’s decision not to deport someone for a given period of time.

“Deferred action does not provide these individuals with any lawful status under the immigration laws,” he said. “But it provides some measure of dignity and decent treatment.”

“It recognizes the damage that would be wreaked by tearing apart families,” Mr. Verrilli added, “and it allows individuals to leave the shadow economy and work on the books to provide for their families, thereby reducing exploitation and distortion in our labor markets.”

The states said they had suffered the sort of direct and concrete injury that gave them standing to sue.

Judge Jerry E. Smith, writing for the majority in the appeals court, focused on an injury said to have been suffered by Texas, which he said would have to spend millions of dollars to provide driver’s licenses to immigrants as a consequence of the federal program.

Mr. Verrilli told the justices that Texas’ injury was self-inflicted, a product of its decision to offer driver’s licenses for less than they cost to produce and to tie eligibility for them to federal standards.

Texas responded that being required to change its laws was itself the sort of harm that conferred standing. 

“Such a forced change in Texas law would impair Texas’s sovereign interest in ‘the power to create and enforce a legal code,’” the state’s lawyers wrote in a brief.

Judge Hanen grounded his injunction on the Obama administration’s failure to give notice and seek public comments on its new program. 

He found that notice and comment were required because the program gave blanket relief to entire categories of people, notwithstanding the administration’s assertion that it required case-by-case determinations about who was eligible for the program.

The appeals court affirmed that ruling and added a broader one. The program, it said, also exceeded Mr. Obama’s statutory authority

MERRICK GARLAND: HE'S NO JUSTICE SCALIA, OBAMA'S 3RD TERM

MERRICK GARLAND: HE'S NO JUSTICE SCALIA, OBAMA'S 3RD TERM

GARLAND WAS APPOINTED AS AN APPELLATE JUDGE IN 1997 BY BILL CLINTON.

Sources: CNN, Washington Times, Youtube

February 12, 2016 Conservative SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia was Murdered.

Wednesday, March 16, 2016 Pres Obama nominated  Scalia's replacement, Appellate Court Judge Merrick Brian Garland, a LIBERAL appointed by former president BILL CLINTON in 1997.

Due to this being a presidential election year, the GOP-controlled Senate has already refused to confirm Garland.

Scalia's open seat places the 2016 presidential election in a dangerous predicament.

If Garland is not confirmed, in the event of a Bush v Gore-style election battle the SCOTUS will remain deadlocked.

A deadlocked SCOTUS court in an election results battle presents two possible scenarios:

1).  A long drawn out, expensive litigation until a decision is made.

2) Obama is legally allowed to remain President until a decision is made.

Thus Obama may get the 3rd term he has been hoping for.

***** Jeffrey Toobin: Sure, Merrick Garland is qualified, but this is politics

Story highlights

• Jeffrey Toobin: Supreme Court nominee is unlikely to survive political maelstrom 
• Toobin says Republicans will likely not bend and allow hearing or vote on Merrick Garland 
• Cost of allowing Obama pick who could tip court is too great for GOP, he says.
• Should Merrick Garland's friends be offering him congratulations -- or condolences? After a distinguished career in public service, Garland has been tapped for the legal profession's highest honor -- to be a Supreme Court justice. But President Barack Obama's nomination thrusts Garland into a political maelstrom he is unlikely to survive -- at least as a judge on the nation's highest court.

Garland, who is 63, has had a storybook career. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School (like the justice he would be replacing, Antonin Scalia), was clerk for a pair of legendary judges (Henry Friendly and William Brennan), and a partner at a prominent law firm -- which he gave up to work as a line prosecutor in the District of Columbia.

He was a Justice Department official and then judge for the last 18 years on the second most important court in the nation. 

The issue of Garland's qualifications to be on the Supreme Court is beyond question.

But Republicans have said that because Obama is in the last year of his term, the seat on the court should be determined by the voters -- who will be choosing the next president. They have vowed, in very explicit terms, to refuse to give Garland a hearing or a vote. 

Most Republican senators will refuse even to meet with him. And while Republican senators have so far avoided attacking Garland's qualifications, conservative interest groups are already pledging to run television advertisements portraying the judge as a mindless liberal and Obama stooge.

It's all very ... political. But the Supreme Court has always been as much a political body as a legal one. Supporters of the President, and of Garland, are seeking to impose the maximum amount of political pain on their opponents in the Senate.

Democrats have already started calling out their Republican counterparts as do-nothing obstructionists. This is how the process will play out, and the outcome will depend on the politics. Do Republicans stick with their base and refuse a vote? Or do they cave under criticism and allow Garland to proceed through the process?

The odds strongly favor continuing Republican solidarity. The seat is the tipping point to a Democratic majority on the court, and the GOP will put up with a lot of heat to prevent the loss of the court for a generation. 

True, a President Hillary Clinton might pick someone even more liberal, but better to risk a fight later than lose one now. When it comes to the Supreme Court, political calculation is nothing new. There were no good old days.

JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA'S FUNERAL MASS (A GREAT MAN)

JUSTICE ANTONIN SCALIA'S FUNERAL MASS:

A GREAT MAN & CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT MURDERED FOR 2016 POLITICS.

Sources: AP, MSN, PBS, Youtube

**** Scalia Remembered For Love Of God, Country, Family

 Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was remembered Saturday as a man who loved God, country and family at a funeral Mass capping two days of mourning for a jurist who left a long and sometimes provocative legacy on the nation.

Scalia's son Paul — a Catholic priest — led the service and mixed humor with reverence for the conservative icon and father of nine who died unexpectedly last weekend.

"Sure he forgot our names at times or mixed them up, but there are nine of us," Scalia told thousands of mourners at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.

"He loved us and sought to show that love and sought to share the blessing of the faith he treasured," Scalia said.

Dignitaries including Vice President Joe Biden, former Vice President Dick Cheney, members of Congress and all eight sitting justices of the Supreme Court were among those attending.

Scalia's sons and sons-in-law served as pallbearers, carrying his flag-draped casket up the steps of the basilica. Scalia lay in repose at the Supreme Court on Friday, where thousands of visitors came to honor one of the country's most influential conservative voices.

The service was a traditional Catholic funeral Mass filled with pageantry, celebrity and a little bit of humor. It was simple, with no formal eulogy, in keeping with the justice's philosophy that funerals should not be dominated by effusive praise.

Washington's archbishop Cardinal Donald Wuerl drew chuckles during opening remarks when he told the massive crowd that he would keep his comments brief "in keeping with your desire to have a simple parish family Mass."

Only two people read from Scripture. Leonard Leo, executive director of the conservative Federalist Society, read a passage from the Old Testament's Book of Wisdom. Justice Clarence Thomas read a passage from the New Testament's Book of Romans.

During the homily, Scalia's son recalled how his father reacted once after accidentally standing in his son's confessional line.

"He quickly departed it. As he put it later, 'Like heck if I'm confessing to you,'" the younger Scalia said. "The feeling was mutual,"

The Rev. Scalia joked that "the Roman collar was not a shield against his criticism."

The younger Scalia also honored his mother, to whom the justice was married for 55 years, as "a woman who could match him at every step and could even hold him accountable."

The family departed for a private burial at an undisclosed site immediately after the Mass. A memorial service for Scalia has been set for March 1 at a Washington hotel.

Scalia, 79, died last weekend at a remote Texas ranch after spending nearly three decades on the high court. As the court's most prominent conservative voice, Scalia was known for his biting dissents that mixed humor with scathing barbs.

He was known as a champion of originalism — interpreting the Constitution according to the meaning understood when it was adopted. He famously sparred with liberals who view the constitution as a "living document" and frequently declared in public speeches his view that the Constitution is "dead, dead, dead."

Several federal judges who are considered possible replacements for Scalia also attended the funeral Mass, including Judges Sri Srinivasan and Patricia Millett and Chief Judge Merrick Garland, all of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. They were joined by a who's who of the political and legal world in Washington.

President Barack Obama did not attend Saturday's funeral Mass, despite criticism from some Republicans. He and first lady Michelle Obama were among the more than 6,000 people who paid tribute to Scalia at the Supreme Court on Friday. Scalia's flag-draped casket rested on a funeral bier that first held President Abraham Lincoln's casket after his assassination.

GOP presidential hopeful Ted Cruz interrupted his campaign ahead of Saturday's South Carolina primary to attend the Mass. The Texas senator has been among those urging the Senate not to consider replacing Scalia until after the November election. Obama has insisted that he will nominate a successor.

SCALIA'S BODY LIES IN REPOSE; OBAMA VISITS

ANTONIN SCALIA'S BODY LIES IN REPOSE:

PRES OBAMA & THE FIRST LADY PAY RESPECTS.

ONLY GOD & SCALIA KNOWS HOW HE REALLY DIED.

September 26, 1986 – February 13, 2016

Sources: CBS News, Fox News, YouTube 

**** Mourners Pay Respects To Late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia

Dignitaries and tourists alike are flocking to the Supreme Court on Friday to pay tribute to the late Justice Antonin Scalia.

Scalia's casket lies in repose on the Lincoln catafalque in the court's Great Hall as mourners file through during a daylong remembrance honoring one of the court's most influential members.

The justice's former law clerks will take turns standing vigil by their former boss throughout the day and night in a tradition most recently observed after the 2005 death of former Chief Justice William Rehnquist.

Scalia's casket arrived Friday morning, with Supreme Court police carrying it up the marble steps. Scalia's former clerks followed as honorary pallbearers.

After the private ceremony, Scalia's casket will be on public view from 10:30am until 8:30pm.

The President and First Lady paid their respects Friday afternoon and met privately with some members of Justice Scalia's family, according to White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest. The president and Mrs. Obama "extended their personal condolences on behalf of the nation, and expressed gratitude for Justice Scalia's decades of public service, Earnest said.

Father Paul Scalia, Justice Scalia's son, will deliver the homily at the funeral mass on Saturday. The service will be held at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception in Washington, D.C.

Scalia died Saturday at age 79. He joined the court in 1986 and was its longest-serving justice. He sat to the right of Chief Justice John Roberts, the seat given to the senior justice. He is survived by his wife, Margaret Jane, nine children and 36 grandchildren.

DEMOCRATS USE INTIMIDATION POLITICS TO WIN 2016 ELECTION (VELMA HART)

DEMOCRATS USE INTIMIDATION POLITICS TO WIN 2016 ELECTION (VELMA HART):

BLACK VOTERS ARE ONCE AGAIN BEING BAMBOOZLED & FORCED INTO ONLY SUPPORTING DEMOCRAT CANDIDATES.

Sources:  CNBC, NY Times, BREITBART.com, NBC News, Youtube

For the last seven years BLACK voters have been Intimidated and Targeted into supporting or voting for DEMOCRAT candidates on every level.

BLACK voters like VELMA HART who choose to question Elected public officials as allowed by the U.S. Constitution, are Punished and forced into Submission.

VELMA HART is a BLACK, U.S. Military Veteran who questioned Pres OBAMA about the state of the U.S. Economy during a town hall meeting. She was later FIRED from her job.

Now as we face another Presidential election, BLACK voters are once again being Forced and Tricked into ONLY supporting DEMOCRAT candidates or else!

But wait a minute!

Has the United States become World War Two Germany??

Does the Death/ Murder of SCOTUS Antonin Scalia mean the U.S. Constitution is no longer valid?

Have Politicians elected into public office by the PEOPLE suddenly replaced GOD??

**** Exhausted Obama Supporter Loses Her Job

The political supporter who told President Obama that she was “exhausted” of defending him, becoming a voice for disappointed Americans this fall, has now become another casualty of the weak economy.

Velma Hart said she learned late last week that she had been laid off as chief financial officer of AmVets, a nonprofit veterans service organization based outside of Washington. Even when she addressed Mr. Obama in a CNBC town-hall-style meeting  on the economy on Sept. 20, Ms. Hart said, she knew that the recent recession had put her job in danger through its dampening effect on donations, memberships and sponsorships at AmVets.

A spokesman for AmVets confirmed that Ms. Hart’s layoff was “an economic decision that had nothing to do with her job performance.” A White House spokeswoman had no comment.

“What’s in my heart is now, even more than I did before, I appreciate what millions of people who are in my condition now have been experiencing for the last two, three, four years,” Ms. Hart said at her home in Upper Marlboro, Md. “I don’t take lightly the fact that I know friends who’ve been looking for jobs for two years.”

“Could it take me two years to find a job?” Ms. Hart said. “Wow, that’s a scary proposition for me and my family.”

Ms. Hart said she continued to support Mr. Obama. And this Thanksgiving week, the wife and mother of two teenage girls is trying to remain upbeat.

“I want to focus on the positive and be optimistic,” she concluded. “And assume that somehow things will work out, that there’s an opportunity out there with Velma’s name on it that’s right around the corner.”

OBAMA NOT ATTENDING SCALIA'S FUNERAL; WHITE HOUSE DEFENDS

OBAMA NOT ATTENDING SCALIA'S FUNERAL; WHITE HOUSE DEFENDS:

Sources:  CNN, The Hill, YouTube 

**** White House Defends Obama's Decision To Skip Scalia's Funeral

The White House is defending President Obama’s decision not to attend the funeral of the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and pushed back on critics who called it a deliberate snub. 

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said Thursday it makes sense to send Vice President Biden to the funeral instead because his “security footprint is a little bit lighter” and he has a longtime relationship with Scalia’s family.

"We believe we have settled on an appropriate and respectful arrangement," the spokesman said.

Earnest called it disrespectful for Obama’s critics to use the funeral “as some sort of political cudgel."

"The president doesn't think that that's appropriate, and in fact, what the president thinks is appropriate is respectfully paying tribute to high-profile patriotic American citizens even when you don't agree on all the issues," he said. "And that's what he's going to do."

In lieu of attending the funeral, the president and first lady Michelle Obama are paying their respects to Scalia and his family on Friday while his body lies in repose in the Great Hall of the Supreme Court. 

But Republicans have slammed Obama for not attending the funeral of the longtime conservative justice, interpreting it as a sign of disrespect to someone who was often at odds with the president. 

The criticism comes at a crucial time for the president, who is making a long-shot bid to get nominee confirmed by the GOP-controlled Senate in an election year.

Republican senators have already vowed to block any nominee Obama puts forth, but his decision not to attend the funeral further inflamed the debate.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), a 2016 presidential candidate, on Thursday dubbed Obama “a lawless and faithless president who's eager to travel to Cuba but unwilling to attend the funeral of Justice Scalia.” 

The White House hasn’t said what the president will be doing during Scalia’s funeral on Saturday, which will be held at the Basilica of the National Shrine in Northeast Washington. 

Biden was a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee when President Ronald Reagan nominated Scalia in 1986. He joined 98 other senators who voted to confirm him. He said seven years later it was the vote he most regretted "because he was so effective."

The vice president said Saturday that Scalia would be remembered as "one of our most influential justices."

Obama also honored Scalia's contributions to the high court during a statement on Saturday after his death.

"He influenced a generation of judges, lawyers, and students, and profoundly shaped the legal landscape," the president said. "He will no doubt be remembered as one of the most consequential judges and thinkers to serve on the Supreme Court."

SCALIA WAS MURDERED TO PREVENT ANOTHER BUSH v GORE ELECTION

SCALIA WAS MURDERED TO PREVENT ANOTHER BUSH v GORE ELECTION:

"GET OVER IT"??

HOW CAN WE GET OVER THE PREMEDITATED MURDER OF A HIGH COURT JUSTICE??

WE NEED TO PRAY & VOTE.

So do I believe several theories floating around about SCOTUS Justice Antonin Scalia being MURDERED to prevent another Bush v Gore election?

Yes!

Scalia's death was designed to Intimidate and Terrorize 2016 election voters.

American citizens need to Pray and  Vote!

Sources: ABC News, CBS News, 60 Minutes, CNN, World Net Daily, Youtube

*** Justice Scalia On The Record

This 60 Minutes segment was originally broadcast on April 27, 2008. It was updated on Sept. 12, 2008. Lesley Stahl is the correspondent. Ruth Streeter, producer.

Not many Supreme Court justices become famous, but Antonin Scalia is one of the few. Known as "Nino" to his friends and colleagues, he is one of the most brilliant and combative justices ever to sit on the court and one of the most prominent legal thinkers of his generation.

He first agreed to talk to 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl last spring about a new book he's written on how lawyers should address the court. But over the course of several conversations, our story grew into a full-fledged profile - his first major television interview - including discussions about abortion and Bush v. Gore.

At 72, Justice Scalia is still a maverick, championing a philosophy known as "orginalism," which means interpreting the Constitution based on what it originally meant to the people who ratified it over 200 years ago.

Scalia has no patience with so-called activist judges, who create rights not in the Constitution - like a right to abortion - by interpreting the Constitution as a "living document" that adapts to changing values. 

---

Asked what's wrong with the living Constitution, Scalia tells Stahl, "What's wrong with it is, it's wonderful imagery and it puts me on the defensive as defending presumably a dead Constitution."

"It is an enduring Constitution that I want to defend," he says.

"But what you're saying is, let's try to figure out the mindset of people back 200 years ago? Right?" Stahl asks.

"Well, it isn't the mindset. It's what did the words mean to the people who ratified the Bill of Rights or who ratified the Constitution," Scalia says.

"As opposed to what people today think it means," Stahl asks.

"As opposed to what people today would like," Scalia says.

"But you do admit that values change? We do adapt. We move," Stahl asks.

"That's fine. And so do laws change. Because values change, legislatures abolish the death penalty, permit same-sex marriage if they want, abolish laws against homosexual conduct. That's how the change in a society occurs. Society doesn't change through a Constitution," Scalia argues.

He's been on a mission as an evangelist for originalism, at home and around the world.

For example, he visited the Oxford Union in England.

"Sometimes people come up to me and inquire, 'Justice Scalia, when did you first become an originalist?' As though it's some weird affliction, you know, 'When did you start eating human flesh?'" Scalia told students, who replied with laughter.

They may be laughing, but in the U.S. Scalia is a polarizing figure who invites protestors and picketers. There haven't been many Supreme Court justices who become this much of a lightening rod.

"I'm surprised at how many people really, really hate you. These are some things we've been told: 'He's evil.' 'He's a Neanderthal.' 'He's going to drag us back to 1789.' They're threatened by what you represent and what you believe in," Stahl remarks.

"These are people that don't understand what my interpretive philosophy is. I'm not saying no progress. I'm saying we should progress democratically," Scalia says.

Back at the Oxford Union, Scalia told the students, "You think there ought to be a right to abortion? No problem. The Constitution says nothing about it. Create it the way most rights are created in a democratic society. Pass a law. And that law, unlike a Constitutional right to abortion created by a court can compromise. It can...I was going to say it can split the baby! I should not use... A Constitution is not meant to facilitate change. It is meant to impede change, to make it difficult to change."

But his critics argue that originalism is a cover for what they see as Scalia's realintention: to turn back some pivotal court decisions of the 1960s and 70s.

He's been labeled a "counterrevolutionary."

"A counterrevolutionary!" Scalia reacts. "Sounds exciting."

The critics say his aim is to undo Roe v. Wade and affirmative action, and to allow more religion in public life.

"The public sense of you is that [you] make your decisions based on your social beliefs," Stahl says, with Scalia shaking his head. "That is the perception."

"I'm a law-and-order guy. I mean, I confess I'm a social conservative, but it does not affect my views on cases," Scalia says."

His philosophy has occasionally led him to decisions he deplores, like his upholding the constitutionality of flag burning, as he told a group of students in Missouri.

"If it was up to me, I would have thrown this bearded, sandal-wearing flag burner into jail, but it was not up to me," Scalia told the students.

To Scalia, flag burning was protected by the founding fathers in the First Amendment, which is his only criterion, he says, under originalism.

"But do you respect that there is another way to look at this?" Stahl asks.

"You know the story of the Baptist preacher who was asked if he believed in total-immersion baptism? And he said, 'Believe in it? Why I've seen it done!' I have to say the same thing about your question. There must be other views because I've seen them," Scalia says.

"Yeah, but do you respect them? You don't, do you?" Stahl asks.

"I respect the people who have them, but I think those views are just flat out wrong," Scalia says.

He's talking about some of his fellow justices, like Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal who is - and this never ceases to surprise people - one of Scalia's best friends, both on and off the court.

To Ginsburg, the Constitution evolves and should reflect changes in society; that going back to what was meant originally when they wrote, for instance, "We the People," makes little sense.

"Who were 'We the People' in 1787? You would not be among 'We the People.' African Americans would not be among the people," Ginsburg tells Stahl.

"Justice Ginsburg and you disagree...on lots of things. And yet you're such good friends," Stahl remarks.

"I attack ideas. I don't attack people. And some very good people have some very bad ideas," Scalia says. "And if you can't separate the two, you gotta get another day job. You don't want to be a judge. At least not a judge on a multi-member panel."

He's one of the best writers on the panel, known for a bold and colorful style. He told Stahl he has to work at it - that it doesn't come easy.

He some times quotes Cole Porter, and references Greek tragedies. Scalia says he does it because, "It makes the opinion interesting, which might induce somebody to read it."

But he can also use his pen as a sword to attack the writings of his colleagues. For instance, he once called a Breyer decision "sheer applesauce."

Ginsburg has also been the target of some of Scalia's zingers: he called one of her opinions "absurd," another "implausible speculation," and another "self-righteous."

"How about, 'This opinion is not to be taken seriously.' He wrote that about Justice O'Connor," Ginsburg points out. "He's rather mild I think in the adjectives that he uses for me. But you can take every one of those words, run his opinions and you'll see that he, all of us are implausible when we disagree with him."

Asked if she ever takes it personally, Ginsburg says, "No, I take it as a challenge. How am I going to answer this in a way that's a real put down?"

"I'm trying to figure out if there was ever real anger," Stahl says.

"I would say exasperation is the word," Ginsburg replies.

"As annoyed as you might be about his zinging dissent, he's so utterly charming, so amusing, so sometimes outrageous, you can't help but say 'I'm glad that he's my friend' or he's my colleague,'" she adds.

"What's interesting is the difference between how you appear in person and the image that you have. Because the writings are so often combative, and your friends say that you're charming and fun," Stahl tells Scalia.

"I can be charming and combative at the same time," Scalia replies. "What's contradictory between the two? I love to argue. I've always loved to argue. And I love to point out the weaknesses of the opposing arguments. It may well be that I'm something of a shin kicker. It may well be that I'm something of a contrarian."

Of all the cases that have come before him on the court, Bush v. Gore may have been the most controversial. It has been reported that he played a pivotal role in urging the other justices to end the Florida recount, thereby handing the 2000 election to George Bush. The subject came up at the Oxford Union.

"Supposing yourself as a Supreme Court justice were granted the power to appoint the next president of the United States. Who would you pick and why? And would he or she be better than your last choice?" a student asked Scalia.

"You wanna talk about Bush versus Gore. I perceive that," he replied. "I and my court owe no apology whatever for Bush versus Gore. We did the right thing. So there!"

"People say that that decision was not based on judicial philosophy but on politics," Stahl asks.

"I say nonsense," Scalia says.

Was it political?

"Gee, I really don't wanna get into - I mean this is - get over it. It's so old by now. The principal issue in the case, whether the scheme that the Florida Supreme Court had put together violated the federal Constitution, that wasn't even close. The vote was seven to two," Scalia says.

Moreover, he says it was not the court that made this a judicial question.

"It was Al Gore who made it a judicial question. It was he who brought it into the Florida courts. We didn't go looking for trouble. It was he who said, 'I want this to be decided by the courts.' What are we supposed to say? 'Oh, not important enough,'" Scalia jokes.

"It ended up being a political decision" Stahl points out.

"Well you say that. I don't say that," Scalia replies.

"You don't think it handed the election to George Bush?" Stahl asks.

"Well how does that make it a political decision?" Scalia asks.

"It decided the election," Stahl says.

"If that's all you mean by it, yes," Scalia says.

"That's all I mean by it," Stahl says.

"Oh, ok. I suppose it did. Although you should add to that that it would have come out the same way, no matter what," Scalia says.

MARCO RUBIO IS DONALD TRUMP'S BIGGEST THREAT (YOUTH; LATINO VOTERS)

MARCO RUBIO IS DONALD TRUMP'S BIGGEST THREAT:

RUBIO ATTRACTS YOUNGER VOTERS & LATINO VOTERS.

LIKE TRUMP, RUBIO IS IN IT TO WIN IT.

Sources:  TIME, Youtube

As the 2016 GOP Presidential Candidate primary winds down, I predict that when the smoke clears there will most likely be two candidates standing:

Donald Trump and Marco Rubio

Trump is not a Politician but he is an Amazing, astute Businessman who knows Politics like he knows the back of his hands.

Rubio is indeed a Career Politician however due to his youth, he is still fresh and open to new ideas.

Both men are in it to win it and would make a great team against the Democrat machine.

*** How Marco Rubio Plans To Win South Carolina

~ 'Whatever happens next, God will either give me the ability to get around it, or the strength to go through it'

Marco Rubio’s play for South Carolina’s religious conservatives is anything but subtle.

His events here start with prayer and his soundtrack is heavy on Christian rock. 

The first-term Senator from Florida tells audiences that members of his family are living paycheck-to-paycheck so they can send their children to “faith-based schools.” His backers promise that Rubio would never utter profanity the way Donald Trump does. And, when asked if he can win South Carolina, Rubio simply says it is up to God.

“God is in control of everything. God has a will for my life and for your life, and for everyone else’s life. 

Sometimes God’s will is not our will, and we should be grateful for that because he knows a lot more than we do about what is best for us,” Rubio said Sunday in a packed high school auditorium, with 2,000 more supporters listening to audio piped into overflow rooms. “So what I think what we are called to do is to be faithful and do the best we can in every circumstance and pray for God’s peace.”

Rubio continued in a tone that seemed more compatible with a pulpit than a political rally. “Here is what I am at peace with: Whatever happens next, God will either give me the ability to get around it, or the strength to go through it. I think that is also true for our country,” Rubio said.

“He has blessed me with four incredible children, and a loving and godly wife,” he went on. In case anyone missed the exchange, the campaign sent along a transcript and video of the moment of Brother Marco’s brief evangelism.

The in-your-face faith might just be a winning strategy. Two-thirds of South Carolina residents say they pray daily and half say they read the Bible at least once a week. 

In 2012’s primary, 65% of Republicans said they were Evangelicals or born-again Christians. It’s tough to win in South Carolina with only a cursory nod to faith; the faithful want one of their own to win, and South Carolina demands public professions of faith. Rubio is obviously ready to stand in the public square with his creed.

Rubio is a practicing Catholic, but at various points in his life he has been a Mormon and attended a Southern Baptist-affiliated mega-church at home in Florida. 

He often mentioned his faith in Iowa, and that helped him place a better-than-expected third place before stumbling in secular New Hampshire.

Now that the campaign is heading toward a final push in South Carolina, Rubio is back to pushing his faith. He plans to be in South Carolina every day before Saturday’s primary. “We are all-in,” one of his top advisers said. 

The campaign once suggested they were playing for a win here, but now they’re trying to calibrate those expectations. (The same strategy called for them to come in second in New Hampshire, where he placed fifth. “Some things have obviously changed,” the same adviser says dryly.)

Rubio’s pitch has plenty of explicit promises, but he’s also crafty dropping in shorthand. 

For instance, during Saturday night’s debate, he criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling that expanded the right to marriage to same-sex couples. It was done in a way that most viewers at home might have missed it, but the religious voters who disagree with the Court heard what they needed.

“Justice Scalia understood that better than anyone in the history of this republic. His dissent, for example, on the independent counsel case is a brilliant piece of jurist work. 

And, of course, his dissent on Obergefell as well,” Rubio said. The official name of the marriage case was Obergefell v. Hodges. For the uninitiated, the citation went right past.

Rubio’s pathway to the presidency via preaching is a tough one, to be sure. Rival Ted Cruz is the son of a pastor and he has made his faith a central part of his campaign, which launched at the Jerry Falwell-founded Liberty University. 

Cruz’s father, Rafael, is a rock star in some church circles, and the son certainly enjoys some of the halo effect. Last week, Cruz made clear he wasn’t ceding any ground to Rubio, saying he could not be trusted on marriage because he at one point said same-sex unions were the law of the land. “Those are the talking points of Barack Obama,” Cruz said of Rubio’s rhetoric.

Rubio and his team are ready to fight back, reminding voters of Cruz’s admittedly shady tactics in Iowa, where Cruz’s aides told caucusgoers that Ben Carson seemed to be ending his campaign. Such a move undercuts Cruz’s character, and Rubio’s team is eager to keep that at the fore.

Take Trey Gowdy, the South Carolina Congressman who is advising Rubio. Before Rubio took the stage Sunday, Gowdy did a one-two punch against the foul-mouthed Donald Trump and the dodgy caucus strategy from Cruz.

“If you’re a parent, you will not have to put your hands over your kids’ ears a single time today,” Gowdy said to applause. “Nor will you have to explain the difference between dropping out of a caucus and picking up dry cleaning. You will not have to do that.”

They’re competing for Christians’ votes. That doesn’t mean these campaigns are offering political charity.

SCALIA'S DEATH & HIS POLITICALLY CORRECT REPLACEMENT (KAMALA HARRIS)

SCALIA'S DEATH & HIS POLITICALLY CORRECT REPLACEMENT (KAMALA HARRIS)

Saturday afternoon, February 13, 2016, SCOTUS Senior Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead in Texas.

Almost immediately after Scalia's death the Mainstream Media was reporting he died of "Natural Causes".

Although no Autopsy had been conducted yet, it was announced he died via "Natural Causes".

By Saturday evening of the same day,  Pres Obama announced via he would nominate a replacement during his term to replace Justice Scalia.

In 2015 a BLACK woman from Chicago (SANDRA BLAND) was found dead in a Texas jail cell.

In 2016 an Italian-American (WHITE) U.S. Supreme Court Justice (SCALIA) was found dead also in Texas.

Both human beings died due to mysterious circumstances of which we may never know.

Senior Justice Antonin Scalia was loved by many and known to write his opinions from a Conservative perspective.

In fact Scalia appeared to be the only true Conservative voice on the SCOTUS bench because Chief Justice John Roberts often delivers opinions in line with his more Liberal colleagues.

Following Pres OBAMA's announcement of nominating an immediate replacement for Scalia, the name floating on everyone's SCOTUS short list is KAMALA HARRIS.

Kamala Harris is a BLACK Woman age 51, from Oakland, California and an alumni of Howard University.

Ms Harris is the highly respected current State Attorney General of California and she is a Liberal who supports Pres Obama's agenda.

Just as Justice Scalia was very Conservative, Kamala Harris is very Liberal in her political ideology.

Sources:   CNN, USA Today, MSNBC, Wikipedia, Youtube

**** Who Could Replace Scalia? Here Are 10 Names

 Who could replace Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia if Republicans don't block all of President Obama's nominees, as appears likely? Here are 10 possibilities:

~ Sri Srinivasan: The 48-year-old federal appeals court judge was confirmed unanimously in 2013 for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit — a traditional steppingstone to the Supreme Court. He would be the court's first Indian-American justice.

~ Patricia Millett: Srinivasan's 52-year-old colleague on the D.C. Circuit is popular in both parties and is frequently mentioned as a possible candidate. She argued 32 cases before the Supreme Court as an advocate.

~ Merrick Garland: At 63, Garland is older than most nominees, since presidents want their choices to stick around for decades on the bench. He is a moderate who serves as chief judge on the D.C. Circuit court and could be a compromise choice.

~KAMALA Harris: California's attorney general, 51, could be another leading candidate. She has the added luster of holding political office, a life experience that is sorely lacking on the Supreme Court. She's currently running for the U.S. Senate seat of retiring Sen. Barbara Boxer.

~ Deval Patrick: The former governor of Massachusetts, 59, is a close friend of the president who served in the Justice Department during President Bill Clinton's administration.

~ Amy Klobuchar: If the Senate would be less inclined to block one of its own, the senior senator from Minnesota, 55, might be someone Obama would consider.

~ Sheldon Whitehouse: See "Senate" above. Whitehouse, 60, the junior senator from Rhode Island, is a former attorney general of Rhode Island and U.S. attorney with strong credentials.

~ Goodwin Liu: He was Obama's choice for a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in 2010, but Republicans blocked his nomination, making him a less likely choice now. At 45, he sits on the California Supreme Court.

~ Paul Watford: A judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, Watford, 48, is another Obama nominee with a potentially stellar future.

~ Jane Kelly: She is a 51-year-old judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit who was a career public defender. From Iowa, she has enjoyed the prior support of Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, who heads the Senate Judiciary Committee.