Supreme Court Rhetoric

What Has Been Said So Far

Although the question of who the new Supreme Court appointee will be is an immensely important issue in the upcoming election, it has received relatively little attention from the media and the candidates themselves. In the first debate, it was not brought up at all. In the second presidential debate, it was brought up but due to time constraints in the rhetorical situation of a town hall debate, not a whole lot was or could be said by either candidate. Clinton attempted to use the rhetorical strategy of identification by saying she wants people in the Supreme Court who “who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience.” However, she was probably identifying with too large of audience because it is highly doubtful many people want someone who does not have “real life experiences” on the supreme court. Trump on the other hand, also used the identification strategy but a little more effectively than his opponent in this case. He said he already has a list of 20 candidates he would consider, compared to Clintons 0, but more importantly he identified with audience members who have strong opinions about the 2nd amendment by saying that the right was “under siege by people like Hillary.”

don-vs-hil

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-second-presidential-debate-live-who-would-hillary-clinton-and-donald-1476070486-htmlstory.html#

What To Expect On Wednesday

Hopefully Wednesdays debate will allow this, and other important policy issues, to be discussed in further detail while minimizing the amount of bantering between the candidates about unimportant issues. We can at least conclude that the lack of attention on the topic of the Supreme Court nomination in the previous debates will open the floor up on Wednesday night for Trump and Clinton to really get their perspectives out there. Trump was a strong supporter of Justice Scalia who was considered to have a very “strict” viewpoint on the Constitution. Trump will probably look to reinforce his position on 2nd amendment rights and will say he wants to appoint a Justice that will follow in Scalia’s footsteps. However, this will continue to negatively impact the LGBT community’s stance on Trump as Scalia was opposed to same-sex marriage. Although I think that Trump realizes the LGBT community is not necessarily his target audience, I believe he will try to downplay the fact that Scalia was against same sex marriage if it brought up. Also, he will probably name some of his considerations that support same-sex marriage, and are not as strict on the constitution as Scalia in an attempt to appeal to more undecided voters, namely heterosexuals that support same-sex marriage.

Clinton also talked about protecting rights when the question of the Supreme Court nominations was brought up in the last debate, but her argument was directed more towards protecting voting rights for minorities and lower class individuals and supporting the decision made in Roe v. Wade. While protecting these rights is very important to many people, Clinton might have made a mistake by pushing to hard left on the Supreme Court nominee. To conservatives who are not necessarily on the “Trump Train” she unintentionally reinforced one of the few reasons that they consider to be an important factor in the decision to vote for the less than ideal candidate. Some even to the point where Friday’s tape of Trump’s lude comments has become forgivable. However, polls show Hillary with a decent lead and her stance on the Supreme Court may prove to have no impact on her overall campaign. On Wednesday expect to see Clinton stick to her guns about voting rights, same-sex marriage, firearms and continue to push for a left sided Supreme Court.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/10/hillary-clintons-vow-to-push-supreme-court-left-ga/

Wednesday’s Debate And One Of The Most Impactful Outcomes Of The Election

What Has Been Said So Far

Although the question of who the new Supreme Court appointee will be is an immensely important issue in the upcoming election, it has received relatively little attention from the media and the candidates themselves. In the first debate, it was not brought up at all. In the second presidential debate, it was brought up but due to time constraints in the rhetorical situation of a town hall debate, not a whole lot was or could be said by either candidate. Clinton attempted to use the rhetorical strategy of identification by saying she wants people in the Supreme Court who “who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience.” However, she was probably identifying with too large of audience because it is highly doubtful many people want someone who does not have “real life experiences” on the supreme court. Trump on the other hand, also used the identification strategy but a little more effectively than his opponent in this case. He said he already has a list of 20 candidates he would consider, compared to Clintons 0, but more importantly he identified with audience members who have strong opinions about the 2nd amendment by saying that the right was “under siege by people like Hillary.”

 

don-vs-hil

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-second-presidential-debate-live-who-would-hillary-clinton-and-donald-1476070486-htmlstory.html#

What To Expect On Wednesday

Hopefully Wednesdays debate will allow this, and other important policy issues, to be discussed in further detail while minimizing the amount of bantering between the candidates about unimportant issues. We can at least conclude that the lack of attention on the topic of the Supreme Court nomination in the previous debates will open the floor up on Wednesday night for Trump and Clinton to really get their perspectives out there. Trump was a strong supporter of Justice Scalia who was considered to have a very “strict” viewpoint on the Constitution. Trump will probably look to reinforce his position on 2nd amendment rights and will say he wants to appoint a Justice that will follow in Scalia’s footsteps. However, this will continue to negatively impact the LGBT community’s stance on Trump as Scalia was opposed to same-sex marriage. Although I think that Trump realizes the LGBT community is not necessarily his target audience, I believe he will try to downplay the fact that Scalia was against same sex marriage if it brought up. Also, he will probably name some of his considerations that support same-sex marriage, and are not as strict on the constitution as Scalia in an attempt to appeal to more undecided voters, namely heterosexuals that support same-sex marriage.

Clinton also talked about protecting rights when the question of the Supreme Court nominations was brought up in the last debate, but her argument was directed more towards protecting voting rights for minorities and lower class individuals and supporting the decision made in Roe v. Wade. While protecting these rights is very important to many people, Clinton might have made a mistake by pushing to hard left on the Supreme Court nominee. To conservatives who are not necessarily on the “Trump Train” she unintentionally reinforced one of the few reasons that they consider to be an important factor in the decision to vote for the less than ideal candidate. Some even to the point where Friday’s tape of Trump’s lude comments has become forgivable. However, polls show Hillary with a decent lead and her stance on the Supreme Court may prove to have no impact on her overall campaign. On Wednesday expect to see Clinton stick to her guns about voting rights, same-sex marriage, firearms and continue to push for a left sided Supreme Court.

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/10/hillary-clintons-vow-to-push-supreme-court-left-ga/

 

The Presidential Nominees Debate Responses on Picking a New Supreme Court Justice

Varying Viewpoints In the Second 2016 Presidential Debate

The question was asked by undecided voter Beth Miller, “Good evening. Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize size as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice?” The question was first answered by Clinton who basically said very simply what she is looking for in the supreme court nominee. She said she wants the new Justice to reverse Citizens United and get dark unaccounted for money out of politics. She also said she want the new Supreme Court justice to understand how peoples are still facing voting discrimination. However her two main concerns about the new Supreme Court Justice have to do with upholding Roe v. Wade and marriage equality. She says she has clear views on what she wants to happen in the Supreme Court after the election but she is still yet to release names of people she would consider appointing.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/2016-presidential-debate-transcript-229519#ixzz4MjGAjeo0

What Trump Said About the Supreme Court

On the other hand, Trump said that his main goal is to appoint a judge that will follow in the footsteps of the late Justice Scalia. Trump has put forth a list of about 20 judges he would consider appointing and claims they are all “beautifully reviewed by just about everybody”. This seems to be a bit of logical fallacy in the fact that its highly doubtful everyone has given glowing reviews on these judges. Trump said he wants the judge he appoints to respect the Constitution of the United States particularly mentioning the 2nd amendment. Trump has stated “He [Scalia] was a Justice who did not believe in legislating from the bench and he is a person whom I held in the highest regard and will always greatly respect his intelligence and conviction to uphold the Constitution of our country.” However, in the debate, after talking about protecting the second amendment Trump starts to deflect and gets off topic.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-releases-list-of-names-of-potential-united-states-supreme-c

 

 

Rhetoric on Supreme Court Appointments

Andrew Leach

4320

Rhetoric of Supreme Court Appointments

10/4/16

Why Supreme Court Nominations Matters

One of the hottest topics both sides of the debate with the upcoming election is has to do with who will be appointed the new Justice on the Supreme Court. After Justice Scalia’s recent death the seat has been left vacant and the question remains who will choose the person to replace him. If Hillary wins the election she will undoubtably nominate a liberal to server which will cause a liberal majority in the Supreme Court. If Trump wins the balance will be tipped in the other direction.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-election-will-shape-supreme-court-and-national-policies-for-years-to-come-1469207258

What Is Going to Happen

However, a Washington Post op ed says that if the senate ultimately refuses to vote on nomination this constitutes as a waiver of the Senate’s “confirmation” power and President Obama can nominate the person he has said he would nominate, Merrick Garland. However, this argument is incorrect because there are ways that the Senate can delay this decision such as through filibusters, voting against it, or simply doing nothing. Ultimately this means the nomination will be determined by the next president.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/04/11/can-president-obama-appoint-merrick-garland-to-the-supreme-court-without-the-consent-of-the-senate/?utm_term=.d02f8ea64590

What Does This Mean For Government

Overall, this election is even more important than the last few elections primarily because of the appointment of a new Supreme Court Justice. This country was built on a system of checks and balances designed to keep the branches of government, and essentially the political parties, from becoming to powerful. This election, and who the winner appoints as the new Justice is going to be a deciding factor, for better or for worse, on balance of power this country.