Washington Post, March 16, 2016

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nat...story.html

Quote:President Obama nominates Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court

President Obama nominated Appeals Court Judge Merrick Garland to the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, calculating that the highly regarded jurist might blunt some of the expected political attacks and ultimately embarrass Senate Republicans into dropping their fierce opposition to the nomination.

Amid a swirl of speculation about whether Obama would use the vacancy to expand ethnic or gender diversity on the court, Obama picked Garland, the 63-year-old chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. A moderate who has been on the appellate bench for almost two decades, Garland has served presidents from both parties and was confirmed by the Senate 19 years ago.

Los Angeles Times, MARCH 16, 2016

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-...story.html

Quote:Opinion: Garland nomination to Supreme Court could put GOP in no-win situation

President Obama’s nomination of federal appeals court Judge Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court led some pundits to declare that Republicans would be hard-pressed to oppose him. After all, Garland is seen as a moderate and exceptionally sharp, and his near 20-year tenure on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit provided particularly good training for the work he’d see on the high court.

Los Angeles Times, MARCH 16, 2016

https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-cou...story.html

Quote:Oklahoma City bombing deeply affected Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland


At 63, Garland is one of the most respected and best-liked judges in Washington, among Republicans as well as Democrats. And he has been seen as a potential Supreme Court nominee since the late 1990s just years after his work on the Oklahoma City bombing case helped win him appointment to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
...

A moderate-to-liberal jurist, Garland often has found a way to work with the court’s Republican appointees, who until recently held the majority on the D.C. Circuit.

He is known for asking probing questions of lawyers, but in a courteous manner. And his opinions are careful and moderate in tone, often narrowly crafted to garner more support.

The Guardian, March 24, 2016

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016...ans-senate

Quote:Joe Biden: Merrick Garland nomination intended to offset 'divided government'

Vice-president Joe Biden has admitted that the White House made a political calculation in nominating “moderate” Merrick Garland to a lifetime position on the supreme court, a choice that disappointed some liberal activists.

“Because the government is divided, the president did not go on and find another [William] Brennan. Merrick Garland intellectually is capable as any justice, but he has a reputation for moderation. I think that’s a responsibility of an administration in a divided government. Some of my liberal friends don’t agree with me, but I do. It’s about the government functioning.”

NPR, March 16, 2016

https://www.npr.org/2016/03/16/126614141...an-support

Quote:Merrick Garland Has A Reputation Of Collegiality, Record Of Republican Support


President Obama's choice to serve as the newest Supreme Court justice is Merrick Garland, a moderate federal appeals court judge and former prosecutor with a reputation for collegiality and meticulous legal reasoning.
...

On the appeals court, Garland has been a moderate liberal, with a definite pro-prosecution bent in criminal cases. Indeed, his views in the area of criminal law are considerably more conservative than those of the man he would replace, Justice Antonin Scalia.

Vox, March 16, 2016

https://www.vox.com/2016/3/16/11249956/u...rt-nominee

Quote:11 things you should read to understand Supreme Court pick Merrick Garland

One really great introduction to Garland was written back in 2010, when he was first under consideration for the high court, by SCOTUSBlog's Tom Goldstein. Goldstein provides a broad overview of Garland's path to the Circuit Court and attempts to offer a synthesis of Garland's judicial philosophy.

"Judge Garland's record demonstrates that he is essentially the model, neutral judge," Goldstein writes. "His opinions avoid unnecessary, sweeping pronouncements."

Like Goldstein, Adler offers a bird's-eye view on Garland's approach to the law and tries to suss out how the new justice, if confirmed, would tip the balance of the Supreme Court.

"If I had to make a prediction, I would expect a Justice Garland to be more moderate, or closer to the center of the court, than is Justice Sonia Sotomayor, but it is hard to tell," Adler says.

....
Written by a friend, this column provides an unapologetic defense of the justice. "It exemplifies the work of a judge who is moderate by conviction," Caplan writes of one of Garland's rulings, "while making clear that being moderate does not mean stinting on upholding essential democratic safeguards, like those against threats to good government."

MSNBC, March 16, 2016

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/progressives...msna816201

Quote:Progressives split on Merrick Garland as pick for Supreme Court

The left is unanimous that the moderate Merrick Garland should get a hearing. But how hard activists will work on his behalf is unclear. And it could matter.

Conservatives are already demanding that the GOP hold the line by refusing even to schedule a hearing for Garland, a former prosecutor and the chief judge of the U.S. District Court of Appeals. Meanwhile, progressive groups, including those that are often Obama allies, face a trickier question: Should they work energetically on behalf of Garland’s nomination, given his reputation as a judicial moderate? A Justice Garland would be expected to vote with the liberals more often than not, but he’s not seen as someone who will help shift the court in a progressive direction over the long-term.

Chicago Tribune, September 20, 2020

Quote:Supreme Court nomination: Merrick Garland’s shadow hangs over the fight to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg

At that very moment, McConnell changed the course of the court and every confirmation battle to come. By the time President Barack Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland — a mild-mannered jurist with impeccable credentials, a moderate record and fans across the ideological spectrum — the Washington apparatus that gears up around Supreme Court nominations no longer felt quite the same.

NPR, March 10, 2021

https://www.npr.org/2021/03/10/972570212...-court-bid

Quote:Garland Confirmed As Attorney General 5 Years After Thwarted Supreme Court Bid

Garland, a moderate judge with deep prosecutorial experience, will soon lead a Justice Department reeling from political scandals and racing to confront the threat from violent homegrown extremists.

And they're still at it this year:

Forbes, June 25, 2022

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasrei...38b7a11499

Quote:Roe V. Wade Overturned: The Ultimate Explainer On What It Means


Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) also played a massive role in shifting the court’s ideology. As Senate majority leader in 2016, he prevented former President Barack Obama from replacing conservative Justice Antonin Scalia with moderate Merrick Garland, arguing it was too close to an election. The move cleared the way for Trump to replace Scalia with conservative Neil Gorsuch. But after Ginsburg died in September 2020, McConnell took a 180 and swiftly moved to confirm Barrett weeks before an election, in a process critics felt was rushed.

I think its pretty obvious that Garland isnt conservative by any definition---and he's now proven himself not to be a "moderate". No "conservative" or "moderate" would have done something so incredibly divisive for such a insignificant issue. These arent the plans to the F22 stealth fighter. Its napkins and notes from foreign leaders. A "moderate" doesnt rip the country apart over some largely irrelevant archives.

As for his nomination to the SC----Lets also understand that Obama was proposing replacing the conservative soul of the court with a left leaning moderate at best---and more likely a progressive activist judge-----so a HUGE thanks to the conservative Senate who saved America from that progressive filth wielding even more power with a lifetime appointment.

Well, he is a "moderate" among far lefties.......

(08-10-2022 02:01 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Well, he is a "moderate" among far lefties.......

He's only far, far out in left field. Just not completely out of the park like those running the Democratic Party these days.

Thank you Mitch!!!!

(08-10-2022 02:01 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Well, he is a "moderate" among far lefties.......

Yep, that's where I was going with this.

If these are the actions of a moderate, then what are the views of Kagan, Sotomayor, and Jackson on the potential for wielding the power of law enforcement agencies and the court system as political weapons?

He's a ******* Marxist. His Daughter and Son in Law peddle CRT for a living.

If he's a moderate I'd hate to see a Prog Filth as AG. I shudder at the thought.

PS, he's not a moderate by any measure...and the fact that the Republicans stopped him become a SC judge perhaps he took it personal and is doing his bestest to screw them over any way he can and he's doing a good for for the Progs, he is liked there.

If we get Trump into office the first thing he should do is fire Garland and Wray, pronto as in fast, rapid, hie, etc.

Blocking Merrick from a SC nomination is one of the highlights of McTurtle's career. Too sweet. And without question, America dodged a bullet there.

And you guys are moderate right?

(08-10-2022 07:01 PM)boss man Wrote:  Blocking Merrick from a SC nomination is one of the highlights of McTurtle's career. Too sweet. And without question, America dodged a bullet there.

The only highlight IMO. And if he was any kind of leader, he could have held the Phants together to have an up-or-down vote, and vote him down. But he couldn't lead a sex addict to a whorehouse.

(08-10-2022 07:09 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  And you guys are moderate right?

This is called an ad-hominem attack.

An ad-hominem attack is a sure sign that one is unable to convincingly win an argument on the merits.

You need to understand that when you are on the far, far left, you are so far from center that anything to your right looks like a far right extremist.

Seriously, some of these loons call those who believe in God, family, the Constitution and Bill of Rights and law and order "far right extremists." See it all the time in the corporate media.

(08-10-2022 07:09 PM)Mr_XcentricK Wrote:  And you guys are moderate right?

I moderately feel the need to tolerate your ignorance.

Does that count?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro