Squiddiddler Loc: Phoenix

“Where ignorance is bliss, ’tis folly to be wise."

Conservative Daily

A lot of people have brought up the fact that they won't v**e for Trump if he's the eventual nominee. I just want to put something in perspective.

Justice Scalia's seat is vacant. Ginsberg is 82 years old, Kennedy is 79, Breyer is 77, and Thomas is 67. Nowadays, the data shows that the average age of a Supreme Court retirement or death occurs after 75.

These are 5 vacancies that will likely come up over the next 4-8 years. The next President will have the power to potentially create a 7-2 Supreme Court skewed in their ideology.

Think about that: 7-2. If the next President appoints 5 young justices, it will guarantee control of the Supreme Court for an entire generation. 7-2 decisions will hold up much more over time than 5-4 decisions which are seemed to be lacking in mandate.

Hillary has made it clear she will use the Supreme Court to go after the 2nd Amendment. She has literally said that the Supreme Court was wrong in its Heller decision, stating that the Court should overturn and remove the individual right to keep and bear arms. Period.

Everyone saying that they won't v**e for one candidate or the other if they are the GOP nominee, please realize this. If Hillary Clinton wins and gets to make these appointments, you likely will never see another Conservative victory at the Supreme Court level for the rest of your life. Ever. Now, this is scary!

If you are a Conservative, a v**e for anyone but the GOP nominee, whomever that will be, is a v**e for Hillary Clinton!

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

That applies too liberals that favor freedom in this country,I think there are a lot of them out there, we only hear from the peckerwood liberals on this forum.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

The better choice, is for the people to see that the original conduct of the USSC is enforced, that is - a non partisan, non ideological court. It is NOT the function of that court to interpret or re-interpret the Constitution, according to popular sentiment, partisan platforms, or ideological criteria.

The USSC shall not make laws, modify laws or interpret laws. Their only function is to determine that the laws that ARE made, comply with the spirit and the letter of the Constitution. They are to counsel and advise the Congress as to the Constitutionality of the law that branch of Government makes. The USSC failed, when it allowed partisanship into it's deliberations and the Congress failed, when it demanded such.

We, the people, will not be served by accepting this failure and fundamental flaw, by attempting to use it. We have to FIX this - and that means taking on the Congress as well as the White House.

iFrank Loc: San Antonio

Yes then Trump or Cruz can push a v**e to be able to get rid of progressives judges by the proof of how they v**ed against the constitution, and or the people's will. Got to clean up this country because this is the point of no return, jail them, confiscate their wealth, and make them an example of what will happen when you go against Duty, Honor, Country.

Hemiman Loc: Communist California

I am all for that.

Radiance3

===============
With 7 liberal judges against 2 conservatives, the constitution will be history. No more bill of rights. American people will be disarmed since the first target of Hillary is the 2nd amendment rights. Judge Scalia died defending it.

There will be no more Republic of the United States. Hillary wll forever reign, and Chelsea will succeed her. Then perhaps Michelle Obama will succeed and follow her children. This government will become generations of dictators and Marxists.

iFrank Loc: San Antonio

If it gets that bad, hopefully Texas will seceded from the nonsense of the one world government of the left, and all that it implies. That would be a huge tax loss for DC if that happens. Just saying it's plausible.