Still, a victory at the polls will bring forth many eager judicial candidates. And although Election Day is still almost half a year away, the vetting process has begun. In a campaign speech delivered in March, Trump said he would release a catalogue of 10 potential high-court nominees “within a week,” saying he would do so in consultation with the ultraconservative Heritage Foundation. While he has yet to unveil the list, he has said that in terms of qualifications and temperament, he wants his first appointment to be a judge who is “the closest to Scalia I can find.” He would likewise be thrilled with another Clarence Thomas, whom he has described as his favorite member of the present court. He’s also made clear that he doesn’t want another appointee like John Roberts, the chief justice, whom he has lambasted as a “disgrace” for upholding Obamacare. To date, Trump has identified three federal appellate-court judges he thinks would be “great” on the Supreme Court. The first — his older sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, who currently sits as a senior judge on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals — wasn’t offered as a truly serious possibility — and for good reason. She’s not only his kin, but she’s also known as a principled moderate and, most important, was elevated to the appellate court by none other than Bill Clinton. The other two are Diane Sykes of the 7th Circuit and William Pryor of the 11th. Both are serious contenders, and both are strong supporters of voter suppression, Hobby Lobby-style religious freedom and the concept of corporate personhood. They are also staunchly anti-abortion and opposed to gay marriage. Readers of Truthdig may remember that I profiled Sykes in a November 2013 column entitled “Meet the Worst Judge in America.” The former spouse of right-wing Wisconsin talk-radio host Charlie Sykes (who, ironically, happens to be an archcritic of Trump), Sykes was appointed in 2004 by President George W. Bush. She is an active member of the Federalist Society. Similarly, Pryor was nominated by George W. Bush. He was confirmed by the Senate, with a vote of 53-to-45, only after a prolonged filibuster. In his former post as attorney general of Alabama, he once decried Roe v. Wade as “the worst abomination in the history of constitutional law.” Others who have garnered high praise from the Heritage Foundation include federal appeals court judges Brett Kavanaugh and Steven Colloton, both of whom worked with special prosecutor Kenneth Star in the investigation of Bill Clinton that led to the former president’s impeachment. The Heritage Foundation reportedly has also given a big thumbs up to: conservative Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willet, a proponent of government-funded, faith-based initiatives who has earned the moniker of “the tweeting judge” for his extensive use of social media; right-wing super lawyer Paul Clement; and Utah Republican Senator Mike Lee. In keeping with his Tea Party orientation, Lee has questioned the constitutionality of Social Security, Medicare and child labor laws, among other fundamental social reforms of the last century. The addition of any one of the above to the Supreme Court could dramatically alter the balance of power on the court and — without exaggeration — change the course of American history for a generation. If that prospect doesn’t make your head hurt, nothing will. Your support matters…

Independent journalism is under threat and overshadowed by heavily funded mainstream media.

You can help level the playing field. Become a member.

Your tax-deductible contribution keeps us digging beneath the headlines to give you thought-provoking, investigative reporting and analysis that unearths what's really happening- without compromise.

Give today to support our courageous, independent journalists.

SUPPORT TRUTHDIG
In this Article:
#2016 election#anthony kennedy#antonin scalia#bernie sanders#democrats#donald trump#hillary clinton#merrick garland#republicans#ruth bader ginsburg#scotus#supreme court#td-original#usa#washington d.c.