Kennedy Retires: We need a new SCOTUS. How about This Guy?

This 5 minute speech got him fired from Fox News



The Man is Judge Andrew Napolitano. The wiki write up on him says:
He received his A.B. degree from Princeton University and his J.D. degree from Notre Dame Law School.
Napolitano sat on the New Jersey bench from 1987 to 1995, becoming the state's youngest then-sitting Superior Court judge.
Napolitano found that random DWI roadblock checkpoints were unconstitutional.
He also served as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall University School of Law for 11 years from 1989–2000. Napolitano taught at Brooklyn Law School (17 more years).
Napolitano hosted a libertarian talk show called Freedom Watch that aired daily, with new episodes on weekdays (Liberty in SCOTUS?)
According to New York Times, Napolitano "has a taste for conspiracy theories".[20] The Washington Post has described him as a "purveyor of conspiracy theories."[21] (friend to ATS?)
he owns a farm that produces maple syrup (friend to Canada?)
Napolitano is a vegetarian. (PETA friendly?)


He is pre screened:
According to a March 2017 report in Politico, Napolitano told friends that President Donald Trump told him he was considering Napolitano for a United States Supreme Court appointment should there be a second vacancy

Considering the war waging between republicans and democrats, having a SCOTUS with a libertarian background would be a boon to our civilization, even if we disagree with him on a few minor and major points. The torch of liberty is clearly this man's driving agenda.

a reply to: skynet2015

Back when i had cable, i watched his show. I like him. Unfortunately i can already hear people calling him a "TV Judge" and comparing him to judge judy because of his media presence.

a reply to: skynet2015

Trump should nominate him just so we can watch liberals go to defcon 5.

The way I see it, Trump will probably try to pick someone that will remain on the Supreme court for as long as possible and Napolitano is 67 years old. Napolitano could be there 13 years, maybe? I do think he would be an excellent choice but his age may be a contributing factor in Trump's selection.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: skynet2015

Trump should nominate him just so we can watch liberals go to defcon 5.

DefCon 5 is near total standown..Fade Out
You meant DefCon 1

So , given that correction , I agree 100%

a reply to: skynet2015


Judge Andrew Napolitano would make a fine choice but I think Judge Jeanine Pirro is even better!



Jeanine Pirro for SCOTUS!

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: skynet2015


Judge Andrew Napolitano would make a fine choice but I think Judge Jeanine Pirro is even better!



Jeanine Pirro for SCOTUS!

It would go down as the biggest troll move of the century, the unhinged sky screaming every day during the Senate confirmation hearings alone would be worth it even if she withdrew during the process.

I nominate Trey Parker from South Park as supreme Court Justice. He's willing to ridicule all sides, and that's the fairest thing I can think of.

originally posted by: CharlesT
The way I see it, Trump will probably try to pick someone that will remain on the Supreme court for as long as possible and Napolitano is 67 years old. Napolitano could be there 13 years, maybe? I do think he would be an excellent choice but his age may be a contributing factor in Trump's selection.

Under other circumstances this would be true, however, Napolitano is a vegetarian and maintains his own maple syrup farm, so we can expect his lifespan to be 4-7 years longer, and 20 years isn't a bad run for a SCOTUS, especially one so dedicated to personal liberties as their theme.

a reply to: infolurker

I made a joke about this yesterday.

Why not? We have a reality star as President. Why not a TV judge on the Supreme Court?

That will match well with all the Clowns in Congress.

originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: skynet2015

Trump should nominate him just so we can watch liberals go to defcon 5.

Why break precedent. Trump ran an entire campaign of division.

Imagine, preaching about "Democracy" and so-called "American" Justice and Liberty... and then both sides advocating for the most extremist person possible just to "own" the other side...

meanwhile, no one questions the authenticity of having a Supreme Court, and literally allowing our lives to be dictated by these people who have lifelong "job security"

Liberty is letting people make decisions for you in the name of the Republic...

I'd be all for him being a supreme court justice. Too bad we've got a better chance of seeing a pig fly.

a reply to: skynet2015

I have the "PERFECT" person in mind for president Trump to nominate for a seat on the Supreme Court.

Wait for it ... Wait for it ... Wait for it ...

Hilary R. Clinton !!

Yes !!

Think about it. What better place for her be called for testimony than the full Senate.
Having seen these proceedings take place before, I would really like to give the members of the senate the opportunity to ask their questions about her past work in the U S Senate, the State Department, and maybe even some about the Clinton Foundation. Of course we all know she would be the last person to give any false or misleading testimony in such a setting. It would also be a way for the President to actually nominate someone who would appeal to those on the left and find out if they would protest his choices or not.

Take a few moments to really think about it.

originally posted by: skynet2015
...and maintains his own maple syrup farm...

It would be even better if he had a molasses refinery and a baking soda factory, then he'd live forevah.

a reply to: tinymind

So devious it just might work. The public grilling would be endless fodder. And even if the Senate rolls over and goes for the joke, we can finally see the process for removing a Supreme Court Justice.

Well other than the Scalia process of removal that was done.

originally posted by: Ahabstar
a reply to: tinymind

So devious it just might work. The public grilling would be endless fodder. And even if the Senate rolls over and goes for the joke, we can finally see the process for removing a Supreme Court Justice.

Well other than the Scalia process of removal that was done.

I had not thought it through far enough to consider a removal process. Come to think of the one used for Scalia may fit in well in this instance.
It is more the things which could be brought out during any "qualification" hearings I think could be very interesting. If she would desire such a position, to just what lengths would she be willing to go.

I think Ted Cruz would be fantastic.

a reply to: queenofswords

Ted Cruz? That would be a first the man hardly is able to meet with people as it is, and to put him in a job where he would have to?

originally posted by: Piggy315
I'd be all for him being a supreme court justice. Too bad we've got a better chance of seeing a pig fly.

This is Trump we're talking about. I have no doubt that Napolitano is on his short list of nominees. Why? Because Trump has seen him on TV, instant qualification. Also, he's a Trump fan, that's two points for Napolitano. Finally, he's from New Jersey, if Trump knows people he knows people like Napolitano. The only thing he doesn't have is mainstream GOP backing, because he's a Libertarian.

The downside for Napolitano is that he hasn't practiced law in 23 years, that'll be rough to get through the Senate. Also, he's 68 years old. This is a lifetime appointment we're talking about here. Trump, and conservatives, want generational rule of the SCOTUS. Napolitano would, maybe, give them 15 or 20 years.

Trump is pretty stupid though so, I don't put anything past him anymore; Napolitano told friends he was on Trump's Supreme Court shortlist