Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Trump released list of 20 potential nominees in 2016. Added 5 names 2017, 20 more recently. Below are the possible nominees:
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Gregory G. Katsas‡ (born 1964)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Brett Kavanaugh† (born 1965)[36][39][35][40] (nominated and confirmed)
Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit
Thomas Hardiman* (born 1965)[14][39][41]
Peter J. Phipps‡ (born 1973)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit
Allison Jones Rushing‡ (born 1982)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit
Kyle Duncan‡ (born 1972)[38] (appointed by Trump)
James C. Ho‡ (born 1973)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Don Willett* (born 1966)[14] (appointed by Trump)[note 1]
Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit
Raymond Kethledge* (born 1966)[14][39][41]
Joan Larsen* (born 1968)[14] (appointed by Trump)[note 2]
Amul Thapar** (born 1969)[15][39] (elevated by Trump)[note 3]
Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit
Amy Coney Barrett† (born 1972)[35] (appointed by Trump)[note 4]
Diane Sykes* (born 1957)[14]
Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit
Steven Colloton* (born 1963)[14]
Raymond Gruender* (born 1963)[14]
David Stras* (born 1974)[14] (appointed by Trump)[note 5]
Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit
Bridget Shelton Bade‡ (born 1965)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Lawrence VanDyke‡ (born 1972)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit
Allison Eid* (born 1965)[14] (appointed by Trump)[note 6]
Neil Gorsuch** (born 1967)[15][16] (nominated and confirmed)
Timothy Tymkovich** (born 1956)[15]
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit
Britt Grant† (born 1978)[35] (appointed by Trump)[note 7]
Barbara Lagoa‡ (born 1967)[38] (appointed by Trump)
Kevin Newsom† (born 1972)[35] (appointed by Trump)[note 8]
Bill Pryor* (born 1962)[14]
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Meg Ryan** (born 1964)[15]
United States District Courts
Federico A. Moreno** (born 1952) – Senior Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida[15]
Martha M. Pacold‡ (born 1979)[38] – District Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (appointed by Trump)
Sarah Pitlyk‡ (born 1977)[38] – District Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (appointed by Trump)
Patrick Wyrick† (born 1981)[35] – District Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma (appointed by Trump);[note 9]
State Supreme Courts
Keith R. Blackwell** (born 1975) – Associate Justice, Supreme Court of Georgia[15]
Charles T. Canady** (born 1954) – Chief Justice, Supreme Court of Florida[15]
Thomas Rex Lee* (born 1964) – Associate Justice, Utah Supreme Court[14]
Edward Mansfield** (born 1957) – Associate Justice, Iowa Supreme Court[15]
Carlos G. Muñiz‡ (born 1969)[38] – Associate Justice, Supreme Court of Florida
Robert P. Young Jr.** (born 1951) – Former Chief Justice, Michigan Supreme Court[15]
Executive Branch
Paul Clement‡ (born 1966)[38] – former Solicitor General of the United States
Steven Engel‡ (born 1974)[38] – United States Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel
Noel Francisco‡ (born 1969)[38] – former Solicitor General of the United States
Christopher Landau‡ (born 1963)[38] – United States Ambassador to Mexico
Kate Comerford Todd‡[38] – Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President
United States Senators
Tom Cotton‡ (born 1977) – Senator from Arkansas[38]
Ted Cruz‡ (born 1970) – Senator from Texas[38]
Josh Hawley‡ (born 1979) – Senator from Missouri[38]
Mike Lee** (born 1971) – Senator from Utah[15][39]
State Executive Branches
Daniel Cameron‡ (born 1985)[38] – Attorney General of Kentucky
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Tr ... e_nominees

The women:
-Allison Jones Rushing‡ (born 1982) Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Joan Larsen* (born 1968) Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Amy Coney Barrett† (born 1972) Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Diane Sykes* (born 1957) Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.

-Bridget Shelton Bade (born 1965) Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Allison Eid* (born 1965) Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Barbara Lagoa (born 1967) Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit (appointed by Trump) (LATINA)

-Meg Ryan** (born 1964) Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

-Martha M. Pacold (born 1979)- District Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (appointed by Trump)

-Sarah Pitlyk (born 1977)- District Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (appointed by Trump)

-Kate Comerford Todd- Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President

Trump's Supreme Court court pick likely to be Amy Coney Barrett or Barbara Lagoa: reports
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trumps ... oa-reports

A Latina... how can the left not approve her? If they don't it's obvious racism and sexism.

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 5:07 am The women:
-Allison Jones Rushing‡ (born 1982) Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Joan Larsen* (born 1968) Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Amy Coney Barrett† (born 1972) Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Diane Sykes* (born 1957) Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit.

-Bridget Shelton Bade (born 1965) Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Allison Eid* (born 1965) Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit (appointed by Trump).

-Barbara Lagoa (born 1967) Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit (appointed by Trump) (LATINA)

-Meg Ryan** (born 1964) Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces.

-Martha M. Pacold (born 1979)- District Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (appointed by Trump)

-Sarah Pitlyk (born 1977)- District Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (appointed by Trump)

-Kate Comerford Todd- Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President

Meg Ryan is awesome

89Hen wrote: ↑Sun Sep 20, 2020 7:15 am A Latina... how can the left not approve her? If they don't it's obvious racism and sexism.

Lagoa is from Florida to boot.

Listened to Trump on Fox and Friends this morning and he stated were down to 5 finalists. He didn't deny Barrett and Lagoa were 2. He was asked who the other 3 were, wouldn't say, but later mentioned were considering 1 who was 38 years old. That would mean Rushing (from North Carolina) is one of the finalists.

I still say its Barrett. If Lagoa gets it, I think it will be because Latina and Florida..

Trump was asked when he would announce the nominee, and he said on Friday or Saturday (RGB's services are Thur or Fri, and he won't announce until after that).

Announcement to be made Sat around 5 PM from the WH.

Barrett or Lagoa?
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/2 ... urt-420045

Must have been leaked..

Trump Selects Amy Coney Barrett to Fill Ginsburg’s Seat on the Supreme Court
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/25/us/p ... court.html

It really doesn't matter for the long term. There is a chance the Republicans will hang onto their share of power this time because the COVID-19 thing creates all the uncertainty associated with voting by mail. But it won't be long in historical terms before the Democrats control everything. And they are not going to tolerate a conservative Supreme Court. All the Republicans are doing right now is pissing off a majority of the population that doesn't like them to begin with. They may get away with it in the short term. But the long term looks very bad for them.

Oh, and if this Court does overturn Roe vs. Wade under these circumstances it will be REALLY bad for the Republicans. You're talking about something the People of the United States don't want by a 2:1 margin. And everybody can see what the Republicans did to get to this point. They're slitting their own throats.

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:22 pm It really doesn't matter for the long term. There is a chance the Republicans will hang onto their share of power this time because the COVID-19 thing creates all the uncertainty associated with voting by mail. But it won't be long in historical terms before the Democrats control everything. And they are not going to tolerate a conservative Supreme Court. All the Republicans are doing right now is pissing off a majority of the population that doesn't like them to begin with. They may get away with it in the short term. But the long term looks very bad for them.

Yes, because over the 230+ years of American history, we have fallen back onto sustained, one-party rule, so many, many times, that of course it makes sense that there will be one major party going forward, as you have repeated over and over again. By the way, that was sarcasm (the history part, not you droning on multiple times). We have never had single party rule for more than a few years in this country's history (even the Democratic Republicans in the early 1800's broke apart quickly into the Jeffersonian Democrats vs the Jacksonian Democrats). Safe to say, we will always have a political duopoly. They can change names, but there will always be a duopoly. I have 230+ years of history that pretty much say you're crazy. But we already knew that.

As for the nominee, I'm fine with Barrett. She's intelligent and has some verve, so I like that in my SCOTUS justices. A little on the young side, but I understand why they'd do that as well.

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:22 pm It really doesn't matter for the long term. There is a chance the Republicans will hang onto their share of power this time because the COVID-19 thing creates all the uncertainty associated with voting by mail. But it won't be long in historical terms before the Democrats control everything. And they are not going to tolerate a conservative Supreme Court. All the Republicans are doing right now is pissing off a majority of the population that doesn't like them to begin with. They may get away with it in the short term. But the long term looks very bad for them.

Hilarious, given the number of people who are taking the red pill on a daily basis. While you base your theory on demographics, I’ll base mine on intelligence. People are beginning to see what the Dem party is all about and it ain’t pretty. People are beginning (slowly) to wise up. Even brown and black people. So you might just wanna slow your roll on the whole “dems control everything” drivel.

GannonFan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:27 pm

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:22 pm It really doesn't matter for the long term. There is a chance the Republicans will hang onto their share of power this time because the COVID-19 thing creates all the uncertainty associated with voting by mail. But it won't be long in historical terms before the Democrats control everything. And they are not going to tolerate a conservative Supreme Court. All the Republicans are doing right now is pissing off a majority of the population that doesn't like them to begin with. They may get away with it in the short term. But the long term looks very bad for them.

Yes, because over the 230+ years of American history, we have fallen back onto sustained, one-party rule, so many, many times, that of course it makes sense that there will be one major party going forward, as you have repeated over and over again. By the way, that was sarcasm (the history part, not you droning on multiple times). We have never had single party rule for more than a few years in this country's history (even the Democratic Republicans in the early 1800's broke apart quickly into the Jeffersonian Democrats vs the Jacksonian Democrats). Safe to say, we will always have a political duopoly. They can change names, but there will always be a duopoly. I have 230+ years of history that pretty much say you're crazy. But we already knew that.

I didn't say there will be necessarily be sustained one party rule. I said the Republican Party is in trouble. And, frankly, I don't see how you can argue with the math involved with that. I think the Democrats are indeed going to reach a point where they can negate all of the Republican effort to craft a conservative Supreme Court majority. Will another Party arise to challenge? Maybe.

Also: The fact that we have never had sustained one party rule in this country before does not mean it will not happen in the future. We have never had this situation. We have a situation in which there is a clear dichotomy based on ethnicity. And it's been in place for something like 40 years at least. Non Whites clearly favor Democrats by an overwhelming margin. It may be somewhat less overwhelming in some years than in others. But it is always overwhelming. That, to me, is a far more valid basis for predicting where we are going than "We have never had single party rule for more than a few years in this country's history" is.

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:31 pm

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:22 pm It really doesn't matter for the long term. There is a chance the Republicans will hang onto their share of power this time because the COVID-19 thing creates all the uncertainty associated with voting by mail. But it won't be long in historical terms before the Democrats control everything. And they are not going to tolerate a conservative Supreme Court. All the Republicans are doing right now is pissing off a majority of the population that doesn't like them to begin with. They may get away with it in the short term. But the long term looks very bad for them.

Hilarious, given the number of people who are taking the red pill on a daily basis. While you base your theory on demographics, I’ll base mine on intelligence. People are beginning to see what the Dem party is all about and it ain’t pretty. People are beginning (slowly) to wise up. Even brown and black people. So you might just wanna slow your roll on the whole “dems control everything” drivel.

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing to indicate that what you are thinking is happening is true. In fact, the available data clearly suggest that a substantial majority of the most intelligent among us favor the Democrats. Also, there is no suggestion that Black and Brown people are moving towards the Republican side. It's not happening.

GannonFan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:30 pm As for the nominee, I'm fine with Barrett. She's intelligent and has some verve, so I like that in my SCOTUS justices. A little on the young side, but I understand why they'd do that as well.

Agree.

She is a better selection than Lagoa just from a case history standpoint. Give Lagoa a few more years of doing casework and I think she could also be a good future pick.


Not directed at you GF, but for Roe vs. Wade, it should be overturned just from a violation of the 10th amendment standpoint. If a state wants to put restrictions (or none) on an abortion that is up to the states.

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:36 pm

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:31 pm

Hilarious, given the number of people who are taking the red pill on a daily basis. While you base your theory on demographics, I’ll base mine on intelligence. People are beginning to see what the Dem party is all about and it ain’t pretty. People are beginning (slowly) to wise up. Even brown and black people. So you might just wanna slow your roll on the whole “dems control everything” drivel.

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing to indicate that what you are thinking is happening is true. In fact, the available data clearly suggest that a substantial majority of the most intelligent among us favor the Democrats. Also, there is no suggestion that Black and Brown people are moving towards the Republican side. It's not happening.

Come up out of the numbers once and awhile for a breath of fresh air and you might find that numbers only tell part of the story.

And, BTW, just the fact that the those perceived as being "conservative" are supporting Trump makes the conservative side look pretty stupid.

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:41 pm And, BTW, just the fact that the those perceived as being "conservative" are supporting Trump makes the conservative side look pretty stupid.

Interesting theory. Tell me more....

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:36 pm

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:31 pm

Hilarious, given the number of people who are taking the red pill on a daily basis. While you base your theory on demographics, I’ll base mine on intelligence. People are beginning to see what the Dem party is all about and it ain’t pretty. People are beginning (slowly) to wise up. Even brown and black people. So you might just wanna slow your roll on the whole “dems control everything” drivel.

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing to indicate that what you are thinking is happening is true. In fact, the available data clearly suggest that a substantial majority of the most intelligent among us favor the Democrats. Also, there is no suggestion that Black and Brown people are moving towards the Republican side. It's not happening.

Mmm Kay.

AZGrizFan wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:53 pm

JohnStOnge wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 3:36 pm

The problem is that there is absolutely nothing to indicate that what you are thinking is happening is true. In fact, the available data clearly suggest that a substantial majority of the most intelligent among us favor the Democrats. Also, there is no suggestion that Black and Brown people are moving towards the Republican side. It's not happening.

Mmm Kay.

I'll just use the results of the YouGov poll because it has lots of cross tabs that come out every week Here are some Trump vs. Biden voting preferences:

People with Bachelors degrees: Biden 45%, Trump 38%
People with Graduate degrees: Biden 58%, Trump 30%
Blacks, Biden 78%, Trump 2%
Hispanic, Biden 61%, Trump 24%

It is what it is. If you believe otherwise, you are kidding yourself. If only the "cognitive elite" as defined by Hernstein and Murray could vote, Trump would have no chance. Also, if only non Whites could vote, Trump would have no chance.

What gives him a chance is overwhelming support among misguided White people without college degrees.That's his base.

The donks are going to attempt to smear a female, a Catholic, and a mother of 7 (2 adopted from Africa). Get ready for someone to come out with unsubstantiated, uncorroborated, 30+ year old allegations, where they can’t remember the where or when, that Barret tortured animals, abused children, cheated, lied, stole, slept around etc, etc. Similar to what they did to Clarence Thomas with Anita Hill, and Kavanaugh with that Ballsy Ford woman.

The democrat allegations that we’ll hear in the coming weeks that Barrett (insert donk smears here) are complete bullshit & total lies.

BDKJMU wrote: ↑Fri Sep 25, 2020 4:46 pm The donks are going to attempt to smear a female, a Catholic, and a mother of 7 (2 adopted from Africa). Get ready for someone come out with unsubstantiated, uncorroborated, 30+ year old allegations, where they can’t remember the where ir when, that Barret torturted animals, abused children, cheated, lied, stole, slept around etc, etc. Similar to what they did to Clarence Thomas with Anita Hill, and Kavanaugh with that Ballsy Ford woman.

They can't stop her from getting on the Court but all they need to do to win politically is point out that she is a threat to overturn Roe vs. Wade. The American People don't want that right now. I don' t think this is going to be a political winner for the Republicans.

I don't know if they'll pay the full cost this time because of all the crap caused by COVID-19. But overturning Roe vs. Wade is not a popular thing right now.