Several Republican appointees from that period were less reliable than others. That's part of what's made the Right so concerned with courts and happy with Trump for delivering.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Hell no. Stevens, Souter, and Blackmun were all appointed by Republicans.
-
Then you have Kennedy and Roberts...
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
really depends on how you're defining "conservative" and "liberal" here. for a while some conservative appointments would be classically liberal democratic (not in the Party affiliation sense) and so would be more into institutions, bureaucracy, etc. 1/2
-
i.e. before you had a federalist society etc. you're pulling jurists educated within the traditional legal system. thomas and scalia are the first wave of ppl who filter in who have real hostility to how the post-war period imagined the state etc. 2/2
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The affiliations of the justices replaced would be a good thing to include.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not at all
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not necessarily “socially conservative”. But if you are asking whether their decisions have become much more originalist (textualist, deference to executive, etc.) since the 80s (Scalia), then absolutely yes.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It hasn't because O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter and John Paul Stevens moved between weak-kneed to completely fraudulent conservatives.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
GOP has had several appointees lean left on the bench.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.