Trump interviews Sen. Mike Lee about Supreme Court opening

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Lia Sandy, UT
    July 5, 2018 8:04 a.m.

    Neither Lee is a good choice, and thankfully, neither will make it.

  • deseret pete robertson, Wy
    July 4, 2018 3:50 p.m.

    They are crying about Garland not being put up for a vote -- But he wouldn't have gotten enough votes anyway. If a Democrat was president would he nominate a conservative -- No he would not. As Obama said right after the election -- Elections have consequences.-- Get over it

  • Edmunds Tucker St George, UT
    July 4, 2018 3:05 p.m.

    ''Given Democratic intransigence'' says it all. Apparently, there remains not one pro life Democrat in the Senate. Does the DesNews know who the last Democrat was that was pro life? National security is not mentioned. Nor economic growth. Nor any other moral issues. ''Given Democratic intransigence'', DesNews should support the President's choice.

  • BigAlAvenger Summit, UT
    July 4, 2018 2:13 p.m.

    Ending a McCain like liberal Senator Bennett's run was a good idea.

  • morganh Orem, Utah
    July 4, 2018 12:27 p.m.

    I love Mike Lee as a U.S Senator. We need constitutionalists on the court. Mike would not legislate from the bench. Sad to see him leave the Senate, but he would be a great pick for The Supreme Court.

  • rlsintx Saratoga Springs, UT
    July 4, 2018 11:55 a.m.

    Complete non-starter, can't believe his name is even mentioned. His brother, maybe...

  • Astoria Jim Mamaroneck, NY
    July 4, 2018 11:05 a.m.

    Harvard: 6
    Yale: 3

    That's not the score of an Ivy League baseball game; it's where the nine current Supreme Court justices (including Anthony Kennedy) attended law school.

    So if there's one consistency that Democratic and Republican presidents have shared, it's selecting Supreme Court judges who attended one of these two law schools (Justice Antonin Scalia was also a graduate of Harvard Law).

    Is this a good thing, or a bad thing? Does it mean America is getting the finest legal minds...regardless of political leanings...or does it mean that the Supreme Court does not properly reflect most of America?

    And, no joke, would this mean that a BYU graduate like Mike Lee, or any graduate of any law school other than Harvard or Yale, would be less respected by his colleagues from Day One?

  • loweye salt lake, UT
    July 4, 2018 9:44 a.m.

    procuradorfiscal,
    The only dictator in our country, or at least the head dictator, lives in the White House.

  • storm3033 Vernal, Utah
    July 4, 2018 9:29 a.m.

    My opinion is that Sen Mike Lee takes himself out of the running because of his obvious bias on public lands. No Senator we do not want Utah to be more like Illinois and Ohio.

  • Mick , 00
    July 4, 2018 7:32 a.m.

    Kathy-

    The timing is suspicious? Mike Lee was on the list for the last Supreme Court pick. That doesn’t sound very suspicious. And you must remember the use of the filibuster rule breach by the democrats led by Harry Reid when Obama tried to flood the lower courts with activist liberals during his term. Mitch McConnell said this would come back to bite democrats and now it has.

    You see liberals, this is what happens when you let the pendulum swing too far. It always swings back the other way. And now it has swings too far against you and there is weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth. You were warned not to let things go to far with obama but you were getting your way. And now you are not. But the republicans are using the same rules you did and you cry “not fair.” Another hypocrisy of the left.

  • Howard Beal Provo, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:50 p.m.

    Wrong Lee. Older brother Thomas Lee is the better choice.

  • YBH Sugarland, TX
    July 3, 2018 9:22 p.m.

    Don't get your hopes up.
    This interview is just for show. Trump is not going to nominate him anyway.

  • NeilT Ogden, UT
    July 3, 2018 6:02 p.m.

    I have never forgiven Mike Lee and the tea party for the uncivil way they treated Senator Bennett. I am not bitter that Bennett was voted out of office. I am just disappointed that I never had the opportunity to vote yes or no on whether to retain a sitting Senator. That decision was made by a handful of right wing radicals at the party convention. Maybe Mike is a good person. I just cannot see myself supporting his nomination to the SCOTUS or any other court.

  • RBC Cody, WY
    July 3, 2018 5:32 p.m.

    Senator Lee's efforts to push for federal public lands to be turned over to the various states will hurt him. While that may be popular with some in Utah, to the rest of the nation's citizens who actually own those lands, it's going to hurt him and be a point of contention, even among his own GOP supporters.

    In Montana, a state that went for Trump by double digits, Democrat senator Testor is leading his GOP opponent who supports the giving of public lands to states effort. This stance is a loser for the GOP as it alienates recreational users--many of whom are Republicans--who live in the West because of public lands, not in spite of them.

  • Red Smith American Fork, UT
    July 3, 2018 4:58 p.m.

    Mike Lee would be he best choice.

    Mike is a real Constitutionalist.

    This would help make America great again.

  • robin138 springfield, VA
    July 3, 2018 4:35 p.m.

    His failure to pay his debt of almost $500,000 to his mortgage company makes him unacceptable for any federal office to me.

  • Real Ute Dallas, TX
    July 3, 2018 3:58 p.m.

    Mike Lee.....really? That is an absurd thought.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    July 3, 2018 3:09 p.m.

    Mike Lee would be a poor choice for sitting on the Supreme Court which is not to say that he has no chance of being tapped for the job for strictly political reasons.

  • Vanceone Provo, UT
    July 3, 2018 2:30 p.m.

    Amazing, isn't it? Kathy openly portrays herself a bigot ("Lee's faith makes him unacceptable!"). Dave wants the Supreme Court to punish the right for referring to Democrats as "Communists" yet is perfectly happy with all the "Hitler" and "Nazis" his side routinely throws around.

    The right for a mother to kill her child is supposed to be sacred, and disqualifying to even consider overturning it. Legalized murder as a sacrament? Heck, why not bring back the Aztecs and let them do it--they at least had a religious purpose. Or the Carthaginians.

    It certainly should not be a litmus test for a judge to see if he or she endorses judicial murder of the innocent like the left has as its key doctrine.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2018 2:28 p.m.

    Forbes reports DHS is compiling lists of people in the media who are influential - reporters, pundits, bloggers etc. Fro what purpose? If the worst possible use were made of these lists would Mike Lee defend those attacked or jailed?

  • Daedalus, Stephen ARVADA, CO
    July 3, 2018 2:00 p.m.

    The one and only question on Trump's mind and those of these potential nominees is whether or not. POTUS can pardon himself.

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    July 3, 2018 1:42 p.m.

    No! No! No and NO!

    Let's hope reports that he's no longer in the running are correct.

  • mrknowitall14 sandy, ut
    July 3, 2018 1:16 p.m.

    Kathy, trump doesn't need to woo anyone. Romney already has this election wrapped up. He would win at this point even if he never said another word about it.

    As for Roe v Wade, just you wait. The short list will end up only being candidates that oppose it. If the democrats vote one down, the next on the list will be even less desirable for them. Like it or not, Trump knows how to play the game and you can bet he's going to win it one way or another. If the democrats aren't careful, they may end up with an extreme right-wing justice (which isn't good for anyone).

  • Sanefan Wellsville, UT
    July 3, 2018 1:09 p.m.

    I agree with Tucker, it will be Barrett. It makes the most sense. But when Trump gets his 3rd Justice, which I'm betting he will, it could very well be Lee.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    July 3, 2018 1:06 p.m.

    Re: "Garland would have brought a balance to the court rather than a rabid politicalization . . . ."

    Balance? How could replacing a committed conservative justice with a committed liberal justice bring balance?

    What you meant to say, of course, is that Garland would have shifted the Court's politics sharply and reliably to the left -- carving in stone a score of politically decided court cases that were decided in violation of the justices' oaths of office, the Constitution, and the separation of powers doctrine upon which it was founded.

    That's the left's agenda -- replace the elected representatives of the people with unelected, black-robed dictators, appointed for life by committed, partisan leftists, selected for their demonstrated commitment to ignore the Constitution to rule from the bench.

  • Kathy Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2018 12:00 p.m.

    Re: Yuge Opportunity. And why shouldn't Democrats cry "Garland"? The Republicans changed the filibuster rule that had been in place since 1806 to manipulate their way into not even interviewing Merrick Garland. Republicans seem to think our institutions are only temporarily in place for when it suits them. Garland would have brought a balance to the court rather than a rabid politicalization rendering the court impotent -- no longer a reliable, intellectual, and thoughtful body, but rather a kangaroo court like we see in Russia, Saudi Arabia, the Philippines......and the rest of Trump's new allies.

  • Dave T in Ogden Ogden, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:51 a.m.

    The best ideas to solving America's problems will not be found in Washington but that of regular Americans. The current big money politics, approved by SCOTUS, prevents regular Americans to have access to lawmakers.

    Every day, thousands of Americans will be diagnosed to have type-2 diabetes because of the obesity epidemic and making it that even more likely the Medicare bankruptcy problem will NOT ever be solved.

    Every day, thousands of families are breaking up, and hundreds of teens are joining gangs, because of lack of good pre-schools, no max interest rates banks can charge on their credit cards for missing a payment.

    Every day, our hate filled words toward fellow Americans we disagree, just spills over to Iraq and Afghanistan, making it less likely our troops can ever leave. As you can't yell fire in a theater, SCOTUS could rule Conservative media can no longer use Nasty divorce mode way of words, those liberals, those communist Democrats, against fellow Americans, conservative media can only use "we Americans" instead.

    It's time to move on. The hate toward our fellow Americans is so high these issues will never be addressed. The US will be no longer. How sad.

  • NEAD SLC, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:33 a.m.

    No way a BYU law school grad makes it to the SCOTUS. It'll go to the Yalie.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:24 a.m.

    I know his name is not at the top of the list, but the President could not possibly do better with any of his other candidates.

    Here's hoping!

  • Kathy Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:20 a.m.

    The timing of this is very suspicious. Trump is wooing the LDS/Romney vote. He isn't going to pick Lee, and if there is any blowback on it, Trump will think of a belittling nickname so the country can snicker at him. The conservative end-run on this Supreme Court pick is that it shouldn't be someone that has shown hostility to any legal precedent, specifically Roe v Wade. We certainly already know that Lee, by virtue of his religion and his stated position, is anti-choice.

  • HSTucker Salt Lake City, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:19 a.m.

    As much as I would love to see Mike Lee on the Supreme Court, my money is on Amy Coney Barrett.

    The only concern I have about her is the whole middle name thing. It's a little pretentious, isn't it? Perhaps there are a plethora of Amy Barretts.

  • Yuge Opportunity Here Mapleton, UT
    July 3, 2018 11:16 a.m.

    The article states that Trump will need to woo some Democrats to get his pick confirmed.

    I'm persuaded that there is no way to get any nominee confirmed by Democrats in this election year. They will cry, "Garland," every day of hearings, and the press will cover it.

    No matter who he chooses, the senate will need the nuclear option to confirm. Conservatives are fine with that.