Posted by Brother Bob on 4 September, 2018 at 3:24 pm. 32 comments already!


Whenever a Republican President is set to nominate a Supreme Court Justice, The Nation puts out a list of “10 Questions (The nominee who is our latest Emmanuel Goldstein) MUST answer”. The Kavanaugh nomination has been no exception, but unlike past nominees this time around I’ve decided to help our nominee by offering some deeply thought and analytical responses to potential questions from various Left Wing Extremists. So let’s get to it!


Nancy Northup, President and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights

“The 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v. Casey resulted in splintered opinions. The controlling opinion, which Justice Kennedy joined, reaffirmed a woman’s right to make the ultimate decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability. States could restrict abortion after viability, allowing for life and health exceptions, and regulate abortion throughout pregnancy as long as the restrictions did not impose an ‘undue burden.’ Two justices wrote separately and recognized the constitutional right to abortion, but did not think the Court should allow greater state restrictions on access. And four justices issued a minority, dissenting opinion that would have overturned Roe v. Wade and eliminated the constitutional right to abortion. If you were on the Court in 1992, which of the opinions in Planned Parenthood v. Casey would you have joined?”

Brother Bob suggests: “Given your concern about anyone suffering ‘undue burdens’, how about the burden of the living organism who is capable of feeling pain and feels genuine suffering during your Right to Choose (TM)”


Chiraag Bains, Director of Legal Strategies for Demos

“Do you believe that the Constitution requires that we allow corporations and wealthy individuals the unfettered ability to translate their economic might into political power through campaign contributions and expenditures—even if it drowns out the voices of working-class Americans and erects barriers to candidates of color who lack access to big money and the mostly white donor class?”

Brother Bob suggests: “Are you suggesting that only Oligarchs who own media companies are entitled to free speech? Sorry, but I am not on board with giving the retailing billionaire who owns The Washington Post nor the foreign national who owns The New York Times a monopoly on free speech.”


Priya Raghavan, counsel for the Brennan Center’s Justice Program

“Justice Kennedy expressed on several occasions a concern that the American system of incarceration and corrections is deeply broken. Given the stark racial disparities found in our criminal-justice system, and our country’s standing as the world’s leading incarcerator, share your views on how we can better ensure equality under the law and protection from undue deprivation of liberty.”

Brother Bob suggests: “What is broken are the policies of The Radical Left that has been an incubator for criminal activity in predominantly non-white neighborhoods. Unlike you, I promise to work to preserve the rights of those who don’t like being crime victims, regardless of victimhood status of said perps.”


Cindy Cohn, Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation

“How should the Constitution view mass data collection by the government—for example, copying or viewing all Internet activity routed through a service provider? How should the Constitution address those who are impacted by, but not targeted by, surveillance?”

Brother Bob suggests: “This is an excellent question. As a Constitutionalist, I fully supporting every last of the unconstitutional measures started under the Bush administration and ramped up under President Obama”


Patrice Simms, Vice President of Litigation for Earthjustice

“Are you committed, unequivocally, to defending the people’s right to access the courts to hold the government and powerful corporations accountable to the rule of law as it relates to preserving clean air and clean water, and ensuring a safe and healthy environment for children, families, communities, and workers?”

Brother Bob suggests: ” calling for restricting anyone’s access to the courts? What kind of stupid question is that?”


Nan Aron, Founder and President of Alliance for Justice

“If a case flowing from the Mueller investigation and involving the Trump campaign’s possible collusion with Russia were to arrive at the Supreme Court, how would you address this given your past statements that presidents should not be subjected to investigation while in office?”

Vincent Warren, Executive Director of the Center for Constitutional Rights

“Two central questions that are likely to be raised in the near future are whether a sitting president can be indicted, and the extent to which the scope of presidential pardon power includes the president’s ability to pardon himself. Given your writing on the first question, and given that both answers are questions of law more than fact, what is your view on each?”

Brother Bob suggests: “Given that the only actual collusion with Russia we’ve seen has been the Clinton  campaign buying opposition research from the Russians while the Obama administration’s intelligence services used this as a pretext to spy on the presidential campaign of the representative of the opposition party. If President Trump were to commit such an egregious abuse of power I would fully support indictment.”


Aziz Huq, Frank and Bernice J. Greenberg Professor of Law at the University of Chicago

“The Supreme Court just said that the Korematsu decision was wrong. Why, in your view, was Korematsu wrong, and what practices are prohibited now that it has been overturned?”

Brother Bob suggests: “Because any nimrod can understand that taking precautions regarding who we allow into this country is not the same as racially motivated internment camps. Who do we look like – Democrats?”


Chase Strangio, trans activist and staff attorney at the ACLU LGBT & HIV Project

“Do you have personal concerns about transgender individuals using multi-user, single-sex facilities like restrooms and locker rooms? Would you be comfortable being in a public restroom with a transgender individual? Would you be comfortable with your children being in a public restroom with a transgender individual? If you do have concerns, what are they and how would they impact your consideration of cases involving transgender litigants?”

Brother Bob suggests: “Of course I don’t want to allow creeps to stalk our wives and daughters in bathrooms and locker rooms. What the Hell is wrong with you?”


Charlotte Garden, associate professor at Seattle University School of Law

“During his confirmation hearing, then-Judge Alito stated: ‘Although the Supreme Court has the power to overrule a prior precedent, it uses that power sparingly, and rightfully so.’

Yet, Justice Alito recently authored the majority 5-4 opinion in Janus v. AFSCME, overturning Abood v. Detroit Board of Education—a landmark case on the rights of labor unions. The Abood decision had stood for over 40 years, and was relied upon by state and local government employers across the country. As a result of the Court’s 180 on this issue, the stability of the collective bargaining systems for millions of American workers in the public sector has been turned upside-down.

Do you agree with Justice Alito’s view that the Court should overrule prior precedent only sparingly? If so, did the Janus majority overturn Abood too easily? And how can we know that talk of respect for precedent is not just talk, and that you will not vote to overrule similarly venerable cases on topics including labor rights, affirmative action, or abortion?”

Brother Bob suggests: “I thought that this was supposed to be 10 question, but what the Hell; I’ve indulged the rest of this idiocy. First, I fully support the right of anyone who wants to work not be forced to join a union and I’m OK with reversing bad precedent – simple enough for you? Affirmative action – I fully oppose any kind of discrimination based on race, sex, religious views, etc. And if you want to ask about abortion, then come right out and ask directly. For starters, how about if for a change we have an honest conversation on the subject?

Follow Brother Bob on Twitter and Facebook

Cross posted from Brother Bob’s Blog

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x