![bloombergs-mark-halperin-apologizes-for-bungled-ted-cruz-interview-that-lots-of-people-thought-was-racist[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/L1U9x2K.jpg "bloombergs-mark-halperin-apologizes-for-bungled-ted-cruz-interview-that-lots-of-people-thought-was-racist[1].jpg")
Should Cruz replace Scalia? Is he a good fit for the seat?
>>68268958
look at his fucking face
>>68268958
I would vote for Trump if he did this... I vote for him anyway to stop Hillary but I would be really happy. Cruz was made for the Supreme Court! He's not the villain people make him out to be... just like I don't believe Trump is as bad as the establishment or the left paints him to be.
>>68268958
No, Trump should appoint Ron Paul or Anne Coulter.
why would obama nominate cruz?
>>68268958
Cruz is a light weight lawyer that couldn't hack it in the legal world so he turned to politics. He is a light weight politician but has bolstered himself by taking up the causes of Bible thumping Texans. He isn't qualified to polish the bench much less sit on it.
>>68269667
it would be retarded to appoint someone without legal training.
>>68268958
Replace an intellectual heavyweight strict textualist legal icon with a slimy low-rent bible thumping prosecutor?
>>68268958
yes. he would be a better fit on the supreme court as opposed to the presidency anyway.
He's not fit to be the vice Consul of a high school latin club, much less a supreme court justice
Probably Ron Paul.
And we should probably create some "career-constitutionalist" children, raised from birth to believe in the constitution, in preparation for the upcoming deaths of the remaining judges.
Until Scalia died I never gave it all too much thought, but the supreme court is actually the heavy weights, presidents and congress are just light weight.
>>68269910
>lightweight lawyer
>argued and won multiple cases in front of the Supreme court
Your views are so far outside reality that you might as well be writing sci-fi pulp fiction.
SJWs would spontaneously combust so I'm all for it.
>>68270226
Ron Paul is not a lawyer and only pretends to know how the law works.
Judge Judy.
>>68268958
Actually, yes he would
>>68270258
>He thinks arguing a case in front of the Supreme Court qualifies you to be on it
>>68268958
>t
>>68270350
You just mad that he's touched more vaginers than you.
>>68270258
I see that a Texas Bible thumper is checking in to defend their light weight choice for representation.
How the fuck are people saying Ron Paul should replace Scalia? He has no legal training you thundercunts.
>>68268958
>finally got one senate endorsement
>needs 60 to get on SCOTUS
fetal alcohol syndrome, the thread
On paper he would do an excellent job, but I really can't bring myself to trust him.
>>68268958
Aren't there already enough kikes on the bench?
>>68270258
He's not a nationalist though. The people who claim that he was a bad lawyer are either misinformed or are just lying but we can't get another globalist on the supreme court.
>>68268958
>Cruz
>Not based Napolitano
He'd be good for everyone
Cruz is a sleazy scumfuck that shouldn't be elected dog catcher.
>>68270482
Fuck Cruz and trump but that literally is the number one qualification for the job of you're not already a very experienced and regocnized judge
>>68270482
>>68270540
I just want validation on the claim that Cruz is a "light-weight lawyer." I detest the man for a number of reasons, but one can respect his intelligence and career without being a #CruzMissile.
>>68269910
>>68270482
>Attorney general of Texas
>Lightweight lawyer
>>68271175
sorry i meant solicitor general
hes a cunt but hes not inexperienced
>>68271175
>former Bush administration official
>worthy of being anywhere near Washington
Nope.
>>68270915
Exactly, I wouldn't want him for Supreme Court Justice. I just wanted to point out that he has a fairly laudable career as a lawyer.
>>68271058
He interprets the Constitution as he does the bible: the literal word of God except for the parts that are inconvenient to him--like the part disqualifying him to run or POTUS or the part that separates Church and State. Also he is really short in stature.
>>68271638
>like the part disqualifying him to run or POTUS
post it please
>>68271551
Holy shit guys, look at this goy, a Republican worked for the Bush administration during the 8 years that he was president. What a fucking genius, how did he figure that one out. It's almost like they were in the same god damned party.
>>68268958
He'd be a better supreme court justice than president, thats for fucking sure
>>68271839
I can't post his birth certificate because he has not released it to the public.
>>68271022
>number one qualification
Federal Appellate Judge
I know you're all ultra-conservative here and you want to root for your boy, but just because he's well-known does not mean he is qualified
>>68269667
While Paul would be great, he's way too old to be nominated. You'd want a justice who will be there for a long time.
>>68271938
Bush administration was filled with only neocons and bible fags neither of which cared about the constitution or even the rule of law. They should be blacklisted and prevented from holding power ever again.
>>68268958
Would be a great idea. He can be the Constitutionalist to replace Scalia, you get him out of the Senate so he won't be a faggot that whines when doesn't get what he wants, and don't have to have him in Trump's cabinet.
>>68272078
you said the constitution
>>68269972
Ann Coulter is a lawyer.
>>68272488
>you said the constitution
And you said 'post it'.
>>68268958
I'm actually okay with this
>>68268958
Yes. It would be fucking great. He would be BTFO'ing liberals for the next 50 years.
>>68272771
to which you answered with gibberish
feel free to try again if you are able
>>68268958
Yes
He would be the best SCOTUS ever
>>68272938
He can't he's fucking retarded. Liberals, everyone.
>>68268958
Actually that wouldn't be a bad choice. He would make a pretty good SJ.
>>68273249
woops it was about POTUS
>>68270376
I second this.
>>68270350
>>68270529
BTFO. Put your shoelaces and neckties in the the safety bin.
Do you guys think that something should be done to kind of cement precedent of SCOTUS rulings?
I'm not well versed on law but it seems strange that our rights can be changed decade to decade by whoever the presidents puts on to the court, With no legislative change to those rights.
>>68273336
So, birth certificate when?
Since Cruz won a lot of support during primaries it would be retarded not to give him a decent position somewhere.
>>68268958
Funded by George bush's political machine. He is a shadow neocon.
>>68273988
woops meant to write "lightweight argument in favor of lightweight lawyer"
>>68273861
The constitution is pretty vague on most things though (except for the 2nd amendment of course). You'd have to change it in order to cement anything.
