We didn’t know how the world could be so upside down.  Prosecutors seem to be on the side of criminals.  How is it that violent felons get off with a slap on the wrist, to go out and wreak mayhem?  We have the unbelievable situation where Supreme Court justices are being heckled at their homes with people in the streets banging drums and shouting chants.  Not that that’s not a crime, and a serious one.  But it seems they’re doing the bidding of those that loved the sacred “right” the Supreme Court gave them back in the Seventies.  Somebody with a gun apparently told Police he was there to “kill Kavanaugh.”  These political criminals aren’t the smartest in the world.  But they do have a support group that shrugs and says, “I told you we were going to have problems.”

“He will pay the price!”  That’s what an angry politician said about Brett Kavanaugh, suspecting that he’s swayed the court against Roe vs. Wade.  Is this the price?  “You won’t know what hit you!”  Those sound like intemperate remarks.  But what do you know?  He was right.  Must be a touch clairvoyant.

We’re not about to recount all the problems that have been caused since the suspicious election.  What we know for sure is that we’re deep into Jimmy Carter territory.  If you were up and running, you’ll remember that as the most humiliating and depressing experience ever.  Until now.

Interest rates haven’t yet reached the heights of the early Eighties, but everything else is not good.  We see examples of criminals visiting violence on unsuspecting citizens, and they’re right back out committing additional crimes.  It’s a trend.  We just can’t watch all the idiotic decisions being made, or the excuses made for everything going wrong.  Nothing makes sense anymore, and we get hammered about discrimination or bigotry for refusing to celebrate, or “honor” ridiculous movements determined to rope everybody in.  If you don’t celebrate “pride month,” you must be a bigoted discriminator.  Just one question.  What are they so proud about?  I don’t think that has ever been answered.  But if you don’t celebrate pride month, you might be a bigot.  Nobody will tell these goofballs how stupid this all is.  Who would dare!

We’re expected to believe, or if not, at least pretend to believe all the nonsense that spews from the mainstream.  Last night they treated us to some slickly produced propaganda.  It was on at least eight channels LIVE.  I heard some of the opening statements, despite not watching the charade in its entirety.  The upshot is that President Trump had a plan to overthrow the government, and the “insurrection” was the result.  Don’t say it wasn’t an insurrection, or some heads might explode.  So, it was an insurrection that Donald Trump devised, and you must repeat that and at least pretend to believe it, or you might be an accomplice.

There’s never been anything as bad as Trump, or any supporters that haven’t denounced him.   The committee chairman on the podium on TV news and on the radio said that attempts to justify what actually happened on Jan. 6 reminds him of slavery, the Ku Klux Klan and I don’t know what all.  Let’s all line up and feel for the poor guy.  Of all the things that were going to turn the public against Donald Trump or make you afraid to stand for any of the values of the United States, this may have been the weakest.  You haven’t forgotten COLLUSION with Russia, the lead story for two years.  Nor the impeachment over a phone call.  This was hopefully the last attempt to falsify the record and present something of substance.  It failed to live up to the hype, despite all the grim faces.  They edited statements and audio clips as if we didn’t know that the full statements blew their whole theory.  They’ve done it before.  We’re wise to it.

If against all odds there should be a resurgence of Trump support or the man should have any further success in politics, you can expect more.  Not only that, we all better get used to being targeted.  Nothing we believe lines up with these new “values” that are all over television or the internet.  Nobody will say the obvious.  Pride month can’t be over soon enough.  It’s just designed to make us go along, or get used to wearing some stupid labels.  I’ll take the labels any day.  There comes a time when you just have to say, “NO!”

Mark

Source: http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/fridayupdates.php

The post Weekly Update by Mark Armstrong – 10 June 2022 first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

By hearing the case in their next term, which starts in October and ends in June 2022, the justices will look at whether to overturn a central part of the landmark ruling, a longstanding goal of religious conservatives.

The eventual ruling by the conservative-majority court, expected next year, could allow states to ban abortions before a fetus is viable outside the womb, upending decades of legal precedent. Lower courts ruled against Mississippi’s law.

In the Roe v. Wade decision, subsequently reaffirmed in 1992, the court said that states could not ban abortion before the viability of the fetus outside the womb, which is generally viewed by doctors as between 24 and 28 weeks. The Mississippi law would ban abortion much earlier than that. Other states have backed laws that would ban the procedure even earlier.

“Alarm bells are ringing loudly about the threat to reproductive rights. The Supreme Court just agreed to review an abortion ban that unquestionably violates nearly 50 years of Supreme Court precedent and is a test case to overturn Roe v. Wade,” said Nancy Northup, president of the Center for Reproductive Rights, which is among those challenging the law.

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, a Republican, said she is committed to defending the law’s constitutionality.

“The Mississippi legislature enacted this law consistent with the will of its constituents to promote women’s health and preserve the dignity and sanctity of life. I remain committed to advocating for women and defending Mississippi’s legal right to protect the unborn,” Fitch said.

The Roe v. Wade ruling recognized that a constitutional right to personal privacy protects a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion. The court in its 1992 decision, coming in the case Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, reaffirmed the ruling and prohibited laws that place an “undue burden” on a woman’s ability to obtain an abortion.

Abortion opponents are hopeful the Supreme Court will narrow or overturn the Roe v. Wade decision. The court has a 6-3 conservative majority following the addition last year of Republican former President Donald Trump’s third appointee, Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

A person in a mask walks past the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 13, 2021. REUTERS/Andrew Kelly/File Photo

The United States Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., May 17, 2021. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki told reporters that Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration is committed to defending abortion rights. Psaki said abortion and access to healthcare have come under “withering and extreme attack” in recent years including through “draconian state laws.”

LOUISIANA RULING

The Supreme Court in a 5-4 June 2020 ruling struck down a Louisiana law that imposed restrictions on doctors who perform abortions. The late liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was still on the court at the time, and conservative Chief Justice John Roberts voted with the court’s liberal wing in the ruling. Roberts, however, made it clear that he voted that way because he felt bound by the court’s 2016 ruling striking down a similar Texas law.

The 2018 Mississippi law, like others resembling it passed by Republican-led states, was enacted with full knowledge that was a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade.

After the only abortion clinic in Mississippi, Jackson Women’s Health Organization sued to block the measure, a federal judge in 2018 ruled against the state. The New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019 reached the same conclusion.

“States may regulate abortion procedures prior to viability so long as they do not impose an undue burden on the woman’s right, but they may not ban abortions. The law at issue is a ban,” 5th Circuit Judge Patrick Higginbotham wrote.

Abortion remains a divisive issue in the United States, as in many countries. Christian conservatives are among those most opposed to it. U.S. abortion rates have steadily declined since the early 1980s, reaching the lowest levels on record in recent years, according to the nonprofit Guttmacher Institute.

Jeanne Mancini, president of the anti-abortion group March for Life, said a ruling limiting abortion to early pregnancy would be in line with many other countries.

The Louisiana case ruling marked the court’s first major abortion decision since Trump appointed Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 and Neil Gorsuch in 2017 as justices. Both voted in favor of Louisiana’s restrictions. If Barrett were to vote on similar lines, conservatives could have a majority to curb abortion rights regardless of how Roberts votes. Trump promised during the 2016 presidential race to appoint justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade.

The Mississippi appeal had been pending at the court since June 2020. During that time, Ginsburg died and was replaced by Barrett and Trump lost his re-election bid, to be replaced by Biden, who supports abortion rights.

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Source:  https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-takes-up-case-that-could-limit-abortion-rights-2021-05-17/

The post U.S. Supreme Court takes up major challenge to abortion rights first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, asked a question pertaining to an issue that came up quite a bit during Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing but had yet to come up during Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s hearing: whether the Supreme Court nominee had ever sexually assaulted someone.

—See Senator Mazie Hirono question Amy Coney Barrett

Citing a statement from Chief Justice John Roberts in 2017 in which he acknowledged that the judiciary “is not immune” from the problem of sexual misconduct, Hirono said it is her duty “to ensure the fitness of nominees” for positions that have lifetime appointments.

LIVE UPDATES: JUDGE AMY CONEY BARRETT FACES SENATE CONFIRMATION HEARING

“Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors, or committed any physical or verbal harassment or assault of a sexual nature?” Hirono asked.

“No, Senator Hirono,” Barrett replied.

“Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement related to this kind of conduct?” Hirono then asked.

BARRETT SAYS ROE V. WADE IS NOT A ‘SUPER PRECEDENT’ THAT CANNOT BE OVERTURNED

“No, Senator,” Barrett said.

From there, Hirono began asking questions related to Barrett’s judicial philosophy.

Hirono noted that she asks those two questions of all nominees who come before committees on which she sits.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Kavanaugh’s 2018 confirmation process was marked by an allegation from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford that he had attempted to sexually assault her at a party while he was a teenager. Other allegations of misconduct then followed. Kavanaugh vehemently denied any wrongdoing and was narrowly confirmed with a vote of 50 to 48.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrat-amy-coney-barrett-sexually-assaulted-someone

The post Democratic senator asks Amy Coney Barrett if she has ever sexually assaulted someone first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The 5-4 ruling included dissents from conservative justices who said limiting church gatherings to 50 worshipers while allowing bars, restaurants, casinos, and indoor amusement parks to operate at 50% capacity violates freedom of religion.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s four liberal justices in turning aside a challenge from a Nevada church. The same five justices ruled the same way in May, when a California church sought to exceed a 25% capacity threshold under the theory that local businesses were allowed to do so. In that case, Roberts said religious observances are comparable to public assemblies, not secular businesses.

More:Pandemic lawsuits from voters, worshipers, prisoners meet roadblock at Supreme Court

In the Nevada case, the five justices in the majority did not explain their ruling. But the dissenting justices wrote 24 pages to complain that churches were not being treated equally with public assemblies, a violation of the First Amendment in their view.

More: Year of surprise Supreme Court rulings shows influence of Chief Justice John Roberts

A woman prays while wearing a face mask at the International Church of Las Vegas. Two other churches seeking to overturn Nevada’s 50-person cap on religious gatherings amid the coronavirus pandemic were dealt a setback when a federal judge sided with the state. John Locher/AP

“The Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion. It says nothing about the freedom to play craps or blackjack, to feed tokens into a slot machine, or to engage in any other game of chance,” Associate Justice Samuel Alito wrote.

“Under the governor’s edict, a 10-screen multiplex may host 500 moviegoers at any time,” Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch noted. “A casino, too, may cater to hundreds at once, with perhaps six people huddled at each craps table here and a similar number gathered around every roulette wheel there.

“But churches, synagogues, and mosques are banned from admitting more than 50 worshipers – no matter how large the building, how distant the individuals, how many wear face masks, no matter the precautions at all,” Gorsuch said.

And Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh complained that “the risk of COVID-19 transmission is at least as high at restaurants, bars, casinos, and gyms as it is at religious services. Indeed, people congregating in restaurants, bars, casinos, and gyms often linger at least as long as they do at religious services.”

Lawyers for the state had argued that religious services require tougher limits than commercial establishments because of their duration and close quarters. They said other venues, from movie theaters to museums, faced the same 50-person limit.

“Sadly, the types of communal, interpersonal gatherings that put Nevada citizens most at risk for spreading the virus include larger, in-person religious services – which are a major source of COVID-19 infections,” the state’s lawyers said.

The high court’s earlier ruling on the issue came on May 29, when Roberts sided with the liberal justices in a ruling against California’s South Bay United Pentecostal Church. Roberts said choosing when to lift restrictions during a pandemic is the business of elected officials, not unelected judges.

Earlier: Supreme Court won’t force states to speed up church reopenings

At that time, Kavanaugh wrote that “the basic constitutional problem is that comparable secular businesses are not subject to a 25% occupancy cap, including factories, offices, supermarkets, restaurants, retail stores, pharmacies, shopping malls, pet grooming shops, bookstores, florists, hair salons, and cannabis dispensaries.”

More: As churches reopen, outbreaks sprout and some keep doors shut

Coronavirus changing the way people worship
The coronavirus crisis is forcing believers to scramble to maintain traditions without bringing large numbers of people together.

Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/07/24/supreme-court-nevada-covid-rules-can-favor-casinos-over-churches/5454128002/

The post Supreme Court says Nevada can impose tighter virus limits on churches than casinos first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Over the dissent of the four more conservative justices, Chief Justice John Roberts joined the court’s four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, California, in the San Diego area.

CALIFORNIA ANNOUNCES CHURCHES, HOUSES OF WORSHIP CAN REOPEN UNDER CERTAIN GUIDELINES AMID CORONAVIRUS OUTBREAK

The church argued that limits on how many people can attend their services violate constitutional guarantees of religious freedom and had been seeking an order in time for services on Sunday. The church said it has crowds of 200 to 300 people for its services.

Chief Justice John Roberts joined the Supreme Court’s four liberals in turning away a request from the South Bay United Pentecostal Church in Chula Vista, Calif., in the San Diego area.

Roberts wrote in brief opinion that the restriction allowing churches to reopen at 25% of their capacity, with no more than 100 worshipers at a time, “appear consistent” with the First Amendment. Roberts said similar or more severe limits apply to concerts, movies, and sporting events “where large groups of people gather in close proximity for extended periods of time.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote in dissent that the restriction “discriminates against places of worship and in favor of comparable secular businesses. Such discrimination violates the First Amendment.” Kavanaugh pointed to supermarkets, restaurants, hair salons, cannabis dispensaries, and other businesses that are not subject to the same restrictions.

CLICK HERE FOR COMPLETE CORONAVIRUS COVERAGE

Lower courts in California had previously turned down the churches’ requests.

The court also rejected an appeal from two churches in the Chicago area that objected to Gov. Jay Pritzker’s limit of 10 worshipers at religious services. Before the court acted, Pritzker modified the restrictions to allow for up to 100 people at a time. There were no recorded dissents.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/us/supreme-court-rejects-challenge-to-limits-on-church-services-roberts-sides-with-liberals

The post Supreme Court rejects challenge to limits on church services; Roberts sides with liberals first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

This will be the last Update before the Day of Atonement (Wednesday, October 9), the Feast of Tabernacles beginning Monday, Oct. 14^th,  and the Last Great Day, Monday, Oct 21st.  We’re thankful that we are still able to convene under the freedoms of assembly and speech guaranteed by our Constitution.  Many (in the Church) have thought and taught that we’d have long since seen these freedoms eradicated, but here we go.

Our most recent magazine cover of 21^st Century WATCH, featuring the protests in Hong Kong has been vindicated by continuing clashes with the authorities.  Word is that China has rotated in “security forces” from elsewhere.  That way the local police won’t have to make the impossible decision to fire upon crowds that may contain family and friends.  It’s a tactic they employed in Tienanmen Square.  Some see the Hong Kongers as front-line opponents of communism and believe they should be supported by the free world lest we all find ourselves in a similar situation.  These people are literally in a fight for freedom against a ruthless communist regime that might well crush them.

The Chinese government has instituted a Social Credit Score system, with the help of social media platform operators IN THE UNITED STATES, where people in China are rewarded or denied certain freedoms based on their loyalty to the communist regime.  Is there some doubt that a similar phenomenon could be instituted worldwide on the basis of immigration, climate alarm, and trans-gender-ism?  It is a tactic that could be used to hurl us headlong into the end-time prophetic scenario if we were to lose our Constitutionally guaranteed freedoms.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson delivered a speech before his party faithful this week in which he declared, What the whole world wants is for us to be calmly, sensibly done with the subject (of Brexit) and move on.  And that is why we’re coming out of the EU on October 31^st come what may.”  That sounds encouraging.  We don’t have to wait long to see if he’s successful.  The British have seen their sovereignty trampled by EU regulations, particularly in the realm of immigration, where they’ve had little to say.  And we see what’s happened to their culture.

We live in a society, both here in the U. S. and elsewhere in the Western world, where those freedoms are in jeopardy.  Under the monolithic government that the socialists among us demand, our beliefs in God’s Word, and the historic identity of Western nations, would be outlawed.  Besides, all of the nations descended from Biblical Israel have been overrun by third world hordes to the point of losing their identities.  Those who would ban our way of life, outlaw our beliefs and teachings, plot to shame us and others on the basis of Global Warming and political correctness, have the mainstream media on their side.  Maybe the incoming hordes will be offended!  Maybe the college kids will be upset and protest!  What they really need is GLOBAL GOVERNMENT to enforce mandates and bans against our way of life.  They claim t is what will be necessary to “save the planet.”

Plotters of the several, and counting, attempts to overthrow President Trump are in the newsrooms.  Some of us look in on CNN, CNBC or MSNBC or the Drudge Report from time to time just to keep up with what’s being fed to the low-information crowd, and to watch the “experts” emote over the latest piece of disinformation designed to deceive their viewers.  We’ve come to expect their blatant lies, and then watch as their “expert panels” predict impeachment and prosecution ad-infinitum.  That’s one thing.  We’ve come to expect it.  They ignore all manner of on-the-record testimony and evidence and bang the impeachment drum to drown out the onslaught of information that completely undermines everything they’ve been saying for nearly three years.

But now it’s even worse.  If you’ve been unable to keep abreast of the details on a day to day basis, you might have no alternative but to believe the snippets delivered in professional voice-work over radio and television by ABC and other mainstream outlets, to include Fox News.  They’ve (point blank) reported that Trump leveraged U. S. military aid to Ukraine in exchange for investigations into his political foes.  If you’ve not had the time or interest to read the transcript of the Zelinski phone call, you might believe it.  They’re counting on most people trusting their professional conclusions while “reporting” provably false “news.”

It’s happened all this week, in a way designed to deceive the casual viewer or listener.   Not only should Trump be removed from office, they claim Mike Pence is implicated too, and that means…  Well, that means that the Speaker of the House should be elevated to the presidency as the next in line.  It’s a pipe dream, but that’s where they’ve gone.  It’s infuriating and designed to be.

Last year we suffered through the blatantly false attempt to discredit Brett Kavanaugh.  Now we’re suffering through another attempt to impeach the first president to stand up for America since Ronald Reagan.  We’ll have to remain patient.  We suffered through eight years of President Obama doing everything he could get away with to undermine the United States, but we’ve been rewarded with a President who truly loves his country, and looks to be trying to retain our freedoms.  We even have the hope, however distant, that those who’ve sold our nation down the river will see justice.  Let’s hope we don’t have to wait much longer.

A close friend recently told me that God wouldn’t have intervened in the miraculous occurrences we’ve recently seen if He didn’t intend to see it through. That, I told him, is just what I needed to hear.    Have a great Feast!

Mark

Source: http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/fridayupdates.php

The post Weekly Update by Mark Armstrong – 4 October 2019 first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Democrats are now the party of infanticide, and no one can deny it first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The post Kavanaugh officially confirmed as Supreme Court justice first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Kavanaugh sworn in

Kavanaugh was sworn in to the Supreme Court across the street from the Capitol, where protesters chanted outside.

Melania Trump says Kavanaugh is “highly qualified”

Melania Trump praised Kavanaugh Saturday while wrapping up her four-country tour of Africa.

“I think he’s highly qualified for the Supreme Court,” she told reporters while standing in front of the Great Sphinx in Egypt.

She also said that she’s glad that both Kavanaugh and Ford were heard.

Without saying whether she believed the sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh, Mrs. Trump said victims of “any kind of abuse or violence” must be helped.

The post Kavanaugh sworn in as Supreme Court justice first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

In televised remarks from the East Room of the White House, the president praised what he called Kavanaugh’s “impeccable credentials, unsurpassed qualifications and a proven commitment to equal justice under the law.”

“There is no one in America more qualified for this position, and no one more deserving,” Trump said.

Kavanaugh had been considered a front-runner ever since Kennedy’s June 27 retirement announcement. Trump conducted a swift and decisive vetting process, eager to push for confirmation of his second Supreme Court pick in less than two years.

Though the president said Monday his nominee deserves “robust bipartisan support,” many Democratic lawmakers had vowed even before the announcement to oppose Trump’s choice. In his own remarks, Kavanaugh looked ahead to what’s expected to be a bruising confirmation fight: “I will tell each senator that I revere the Constitution. I believe that an independent judiciary is the crown jewel of our constitutional republic.

Leader McConnell  @SenateMajLdr

Judge Kavanaugh has won the respect of his peers in the legal community and demonstrates a firm understanding of the role of a judge in our republic. I look fwd to meeting w/ him and to the Senate’s thorough consideration of his nomination.

“If confirmed by the Senate, I will keep an open mind in every case, and I will always strive to preserve the Constitution of the United States and the American rule of law.”

He said a judge “must interpret the law, not make the law.”

Vice President Mike Pence @VP

Judge Kavanaugh is a man of great integrity, intellect and reverence for the laws and Constitution of the United States. The US Senate should move swiftly to confirm Judge Kavanaugh as the newest justice to the SCOTUS!

The four finalists – Kavanaugh and fellow appeals court judges Amy Coney Barrett, Thomas Hardiman and Raymond Kethledge – were drawn from a list of 25 names vetted by conservative groups.

A clue to Kavanaugh’s nomination emerged hours before the announcement when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a written opinion in which the judge sided with the majority. The D.C. court does not typically issue opinions on Mondays except in response to emergency petitions, suggesting the case had to be disposed of before Kavanaugh was nominated for the high court.

In the hours leading up to Trump’s announcement, crowds of pro-choice and pro-life protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court building. Some chanted “Kavanaugh has got to go” as news of the nomination spread through the crowd. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., spoke to the crowd and led an anti-Kavanaugh chant, though her own words were drowned out by protesters.

Shannon Bream @ShannonBream

Very few times I’ve felt threatened while out in the field. The mood here tonight is very volatile. Law enforcement appears to be closing down 1st Street in front of SCOTUS.

The protests were a snapshot of the intense battle to come, on Capitol Hill and in midterm races across the country where the nomination will factor heavily.

Kavanaugh has a deep judicial record, having written about 300 opinions.

A former law clerk to Kennedy in 1993, he was elevated to the powerful federal appeals court in the District of Columbia by President George W. Bush, under whom he had served as a White House lawyer and staff secretary. Kavanaugh, 53, also won the confidence of key players in the Bush circle such as strategist Karl Rove.

Kavanaugh was nominated to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals by his former boss, George W. Bush, in 2006.

This, however, had risked being something of a double-edged sword for Kavanaugh in the Trump era, raising concerns among some Trump supporters that he was too much of a D.C. insider and too closely associated with the Bush circle.

The Bush connections also harmed him with Democrats at the time of his initial nomination, who delayed his confirmation. But despite the criticism, he wore his support for Bush on his sleeve. It remains to be seen if those ties will complicate his confirmation process now — both with Democrats and Trump’s base.

In a statement, Bush said Trump had made an “outstanding decision” in nominating Kavanaugh.

“Brett is a brilliant jurist who has faithfully applied the Constitution and laws throughout his 12 years on the D.C. Circuit. He is a fine husband, father, and friend – and a man of the highest integrity. He will make a superb Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Jeb Bush @JebBush

Excellent choice for SCOTUS. Judge Kavanaugh will be a strong defender of the Constitution.

Trump may have been swayed in part because of Kavanaugh’s record of being a reliable conservative on the court – and reining in dozens of administrative decisions of the Obama White House. There are some question marks for conservatives, particularly an ObamaCare ruling years ago.

In a 2011 case, Kavanaugh acknowledged in his dissent that the Affordable Care Act’s “individual mandate provision” could fit “comfortably within Congress’ Taxing Clause power.” His detractors say that language helped provide the road map for the Supreme Court to uphold the mandate a year later.

Mitt Romney @MittRomney

Esteemed by his colleagues, faithful to the Constitution, a record of thoughtful decisions, and already confirmed for the DC Circuit; Brett Kavanaugh has the right stuff.

However, supporters of Kavanaugh have pushed back against that argument. Justin Walker, a former Kavanaugh clerk, argued that the judge’s “hypothetical discussion” about the Taxing Clause has been misinterpreted and is actually “a road map to the conclusion reached by the dissenters—that the individual mandate is unconstitutional under the Taxing Clause.”

It’s also unclear how Kavanaugh would rule on abortion, as he has never directly confronted the issue as a judge. Last year, Kavanaugh dissented from a decision allowing an illegal immigrant to receive an abortion, but pro-life conservatives have criticized him for not going far enough. Specifically, they have expressed concern about language where Kavanaugh wrote “the unlawful immigrant minor is assumed to have a right under precedent to an abortion.”

Protesters gathered outside the Supreme Court in Washington before and after Trump’s pick was announced.

The administration announced earlier Monday that former Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona would guide the nominee through the Senate confirmation process. Before retiring in 2013, Kyl was a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which will be the first to consider the nomination. The White House hopes Kyl’s close ties to Senate Republicans will help smooth the path for Kavanaugh.

In addition, the conservative group Judicial Crisis Network will launch a $1.4 million ad buy in support of Kavanaugh, running advertisements in Alabama, Indiana, North Dakota, and West Virginia – states with Democratic senators on the fence about supporting Trump’s nominee.

Kirsten Gillibrand @SenGillibrand

Replying to @SenGillibrand

I stand by my pledge to vote no on President Trump’s nominee, because the American people deserve the opportunity to make their voices heard in November about this lifetime appointment.

Kirsten Gillibrand @SenGillibrand

Tell your senators to hold the line. Tell them to refuse to hold a hearing. Tell them not to confirm anyone until after the midterm elections – when we can recommend a bipartisan nominee. Call, and don’t stop calling. There’s too much at stake not to raise your voice right now.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer vowed Monday to oppose Kavanaugh’s nomination “with everything I have,” saying that Trump had “has put reproductive rights and freedoms and health care protections for millions of Americans on the judicial chopping block.”

“If Americans believe in a woman’s right to make her own reproductive choices, and that health insurance companies shouldn’t be able to charge people more based on pre-existing conditions, now is the time to fight,” Schumer said. “Im calling on Americans from all walks of life to make their voices heard from now until the end of this battle.”

A senior White House source told Fox News that five Democratic senators – Judiciary Committee ranking member Dianne Feinstein, Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Doug Jones of Alabama, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia – were invited to attend the nomination announcement. All five declined.

Bernie Sanders @SenSanders

President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh will be a rubber-stamp for an extreme, right-wing agenda pushed by corporations and billionaires. We must mobilize the American people to defeat Trump’s right-wing, reactionary nominee.

Of the five, Donnelly, Heitkamp and Manchin voted to confirm Gorsuch last year — and are up for re-election. Jones, who was elected to the Senate in a December 2017 special election after Gorsuch was confirmed, is not up for re-election until 2020. He told CNN on Sunday that he was “not an automatic, knee-jerk no” on any of the potential nominees.

Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, seen as most likely among Republicans to consider voting against a Trump nomination, also declined invitations to attend.

Fox News’ Adam Shaw, Bill Mears, Chad Pergram, David McAlpine John Roberts, Serafin Gomez and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

---

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/07/09/trump-nominates-brett-kavanaugh-to-supreme-court.html

[Disclaimer]

The post Trump nominates Brett Kavanaugh to Supreme Court first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.