One of the persons being considered for the Supreme Court is Michelle Childs. Ms. Childs received a MA from USC and her Law Degree. Would be neat to have a Supreme Court judge from our USC!
Last edited:
OT: Michelle Childs - USC grad
- Thread starter nikolas22
- Start date
While I agree I’m betting that a lot on here won’t because of political affiliation
Isn’t it sad, our country has gotten like this! Judge Beyer had a vote of 87-9. Judge Roberts 78-22. Now, it is a battle to get 51 votes. I am just proud we have a Carolina graduate being considered. Forever to Thee.
Last edited:
Not really. These people make decisions that impact our lives. People deserve to know if they are unbiased judges or activists that push agendas.
What is sad is how politicians trainwrecked the process like they did with Kavanaugh. One of the dirtiest things I've ever seen in Washington.
She invited me to her sorority party and grouped me. She had drunk a lot of beer. All the girls were doing it. And I think she boofed. It says it in her yearbook . I would Fly up to her nomination and tell everyone but I am scared to fly. But actually I have flown. I told my best friend about it but he does not believe me. Other than that I have told anyone for 25 years………..
Obviously some of you fellas weren't around when Bush nominated Clarence Thomas ( a black man) to see what the other side put him through.
I love USC with everything I got, but I had a few terrible professors in the criminal justice department. If she learned from them, it might be scary for her to be allowed to make any decisions.
Btw, I have no clue if she's white, black, republican, or democrat. Just stating we have some crazy ass professors.
Btw, I have no clue if she's white, black, republican, or democrat. Just stating we have some crazy ass professors.
Depends on how she performs her duty. Will she follow Constitution or be a political pundit.....Being a SC grad isn't a free pass, but does give extra consideration in my book
What he went through was criminal. And Brandon was the guy who let it all happen.
Did you attend USC’s law school? Ms. Childs did not take criminal justice classes at Carolina. They are not under the law school! So…she did not have your crazy professors. She graduated from our business school and law school.
A good friend who is a well known attorney in the Midlands, and also a staunch conservative gave her a ringing endorsement to us yesterday. States that she has always been very fair and evenhanded and that with a liberal coming on board it would be hard to find anyone better.
Including our Demented President, in regards as to how Clarence Thomas was treated by the Senate!
The sitting President chooses candidates for the Supreme Court. The choice will be a Black woman with liberal views. If that’s the criteria, might as well be a USC LAW SCHOOL grad!
Both of our Senators, I believe, will support her. Would be nice to have a judge that is not from an Ivy League school.
It really would be an amazing thing for the USC School of Law.
It would be nice for a judge to follow the Constitution not their political leanings. We had a judge at the vaccine mandate hearing throw out absolutely false information fed to her by the false press. Follow the Constitution!
So you hate all the Supreme Court judges I see.
I avoid politics in here like the plague. But the Kavanaugh fiasco didn’t happen in an isolated vacuum. It followed the unprecedented refusal by Mitch McConnell to vote on Marrick Garland for a full year under Obama, and it was followed by a much less contentious seating of Amy Coney Barrett, who was also nominated by Trump just like Kavanaugh. Just pointing out that there are subtleties, even in a hotly divided congress.
I knew Michelle a little bit. I worked with her years ago at LLR. Very nice. Very professional. She was a "no-nonsense" person but also easy to talk to and completely fair in everything I saw her do. She didn't appear to have any political agenda. I never heard her talk politics.
She was the first deputy director that I saw there in years that actually had regular meetings with all the employees seeking their feedback on how things were going at work and taking suggestions from employees. I remember one such meeting where some folks were complaining about something that was essentially a state law or proposed law and she told them that complaining about it wouldn't help anyone but how everyone adjusted to such things out of our control was key to handling the situation.
I remember once she invited someone in the county coroner's office to talk to some of the employees of one of the departments about how to be sensitive to the public when dealing with difficult situations.
We had never had any deputy director even talk to us about anything. She was a breath of fresh air so I liked her and thought she was impressive. She seemed very respectful of everyone in the office and I always liked how she was interested in hearing from just the regular, day to day, employees in the office.
Last edited:
Ummh… it actually started with the the way Robert Borke was treated by Democrats — especially by Sen Edward Kennedy — lowlife bastard that he was. Their success gave them the Borkeing strategy they now use whenever a Republican President nominates a conservative for a Supreme Court vacancy.
Well, I sure was. I do remember it. It was awful for him.
But the lady that accused him has been 100% consistent with her story for 30 years now. Do I know the truth? No.
Would it surprise me that she made it up and stuck to her story all this time even though it hurt her career? No.
Would it surprise me that she was telling you truth? No.
It was a mess. But I'm not sure if how you ignore such a story either. I mean what is the game-plan for ignoring a story like that? Is that even possible? I don't see how.
What is the game-plan for taking an accusation seriously, hearing it, getting it out in the open and hearing both sides without causing any pain or trouble? I don't know the answer to that. I don't think anyone does.
In the end, she was able to tell her story in public. He was able to defend himself in public in a messy way and he was confirmed.
You better thank your lucky stars Garland didn't make the court. He's showing he's nothing but a mindless political hack. Crime runs crazy through the US and he's worried about wokeness.
If you follow the court, you realize that judges on both sides often cite unsupported news accounts, etc. It's one of of the dangers of Justices speaking in open court.
Sotomayor did that in this situation but it's pretty common for the Justices to do that. In fact, in another recent case Kavenaugh did the same thing and cited a lower court judge but misquoted him pretty badly. It happens.
I like Garland a lot. I think he's actually one of the least political AG's we've had. If anyone had a "right" to be political, it would be Garland. The way he was treated, as even some Republicans in Congress have admitted, was wrong and was 100% political.
John Ashcroft - He fought culture wars more than strict political ones.
Alberto Gonzalez- fairly political. Was seen as taking orders from Bush more than Ashcroft. His rep was hurt because he tried to find a way to justify torture to please the Bush Administration.
Eric Holder was very political- and served 8 years so his impact was influential.
Jeff Sessions was very political. But his tenure was short so it wasn't as impactful.
Bill Barr was quite political but not as political as Sessions or Holder in the overall scheme of things.
Garland, on the whole, is much more like Barr than Sessions or Holder.
I would not be surprised if Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham both end up supporting her in the end - if she was nominated.
She's well respected in the legal community.
She recently upheld the convictions of the Chester County Sheriff's fraud conviction - which was the right move.
Her experience is also a bit different than some of the judges on the court.
Amy Barrett was a law professor and then jumped to the court of appeals She wasn't a trial judge like Michelle Childs.
Trial judges see the gritty nuts and bolts of every day life. It provides a different experience for a judge.
Right. Not up on many of Garland's actions are you. He does what ever the White House tells him and has no thought of following present laws.
Last edited:
That sounds encouraging, and most likely means she won't be nominated.
Yes, a college friend of mine from USC works in his department.
I disagree with your characterization - which sounds like right wing cable news and radio talk, not reality.
If she is even close to the middle, a moderate or is not an activist from the bench she will not get serious consideration because Biden will be told by activist groups who he will nominate. I couldn’t care less the nominees gender or race. Do they follow the law and do they refrain from legislating from the bench. The scary part to me is one of the candidates, Brown Jackson, has had her rulings overturned unanimously on multiple occasions from an appeals court and yet she is one of the top candidates.
Why is that scary?
There is no judge on the court that worked as a judge before that didn't have a number of their opinions overturned- many of them unanimously.
An impossible standard is hard to live up to.
Sounds like he's sucking up. The credentials of who Branden is going to shoose are pathetic and embarrassing. She will forever be known as the Token Black Female.
So you were ok with activist groups like The Justice Crises Network and the Federalist Society sending the White House a list of "approved" judges for Trump to select- then Trump saying he would use their list?
Just checking to make sure you didn't like that too.
Is Amy Barrett considered the token female because Trump announced his next pick would be a woman (excluding the men on the list that was made public)?
Did Conservatives consider Sandra Day O'Connor - a mid level judge on the Arizona State Court of Appeals a token female because Ronald Reagan, in the presidential campaign in October 1980 said he was going to select a female judge if he was elected President?
I never heard heard her called the token female because he said he's appoint a female.
Odd how that seems to apply to a black female though.
I just like to see consistency.
Yep. there's a reason McConnell blocked his nomination, that's what the Senate is there for. MG is now known to be a radical hack that had no business being on the SC. McConnell apparently knew this and saved the country a lot of heart ache and fortunately got a constitutional judge on the bench.
You're an Idiot.
Thanks for that detailed discussion. I am going to consider that a good thing since you resorted to personal attacks.
I guess I consider that a compliment. LOL.
