"Hatch is absolutely incorrect. Superstition does not deserve special
consideration."... and neither does skepticism. You should be
able to disbelieve what you like. And others should be able to believe as they
like without being attacked by those who feel themselves intellectually
superior. People should be allowed to believe what they like - so
long as their doing so doesn't deprive another their right to believe as
their conscience dictates. It doesn't matter if religious symbols offend
you.... if you don't believe, they don't mean anything... and
shouldn't offend. If your offended by someone else beliefs, then thats a
personal issue. Not societies.
@Ranch wrote,"Orrin, the antipathy isn't towards
"religious liberty", the antipathy is against bigotry using religion as
an excuse."And with that sentence, you've summarized the
entire "religious liberty" movement.@water rocket wrote,"Everybody discriminates in one way or another, and that is
perfectly fine, since it guarantees our freedom to choose."You
see it as "fine" if a white elementary school principal turned away a
black child? Would it be "fine" if an LDS bishop turned
away a black family that wanted to be baptized?Would it be
"fine" if an Alabama high school principal refused to let the
valedictorian speak at her graduation--because she was LDS? Is it
"fine" when a Texas town approves a building permit for a Baptist church
but turns down one for a similarly situated LDS meetinghouse because of alleged
concerns about residential neighborhood traffic?Is it "fine"
when it's YOUR ox that is being gored?
The path to Communism.... Democrat, Liberal, Socialist, Marxist and then
Communist. The Democrat party has moved passed Liberalism and now is
@Flashback;Hatch is absolutely incorrect. Superstition does not
deserve special consideration.
@lost in DC"You mean doing what Biden suggested?"I
wish they did what Biden suggested. Biden didn't say to wait
until a new President/Congress was in power, he said to wait after the November
election and do it during the lame duck period. He also said that if
the President were to nominate one anyway to fill a vacancy then the Senate had
a duty to consider them. The Biden Rule is really just that if there's a
really late vacancy it might be better to do it in November-December after the
election so that the confirmation process is less politicized. If
they followed the Biden Rule, Garland would've been confirmed in December
2016. They did not. Conservatives just like misrepresenting Biden's speech
to justify their theft of a Supreme Court seat.
Hatch is absolutely correct.
Senator Hatch has the audacity to complain about court packing after his
leadership in the Merrick Garland fiasco? Bold.
In our increasingly secular society. politics is becoming the pre-eminent
religion and political correctness as defined by one sector of the political
spectrum the most vociferous sect.
Mr. Hatch, this is what happens when politicians dump the rules, procedures, and
conventions that were put in place to encourage cooperation and safeguard the
best interests of the people.Party A blocks a supreme court nominee
to further their own agenda, Party B escalates and packs the court. Party B
exercises the nuclear option, Party A reciprocates as soon as they have the
chance. Party A issues executive orders to circumvent congress, Party B rescinds
them and issues their own.This is what happens when politicians like
yourself cease to care about the constitution and genuflect at the altar of
"But wasn’t it Sotomayor who said the court NEEDED the views of a
Puerto Rican female? (or something of the sort), so obviously at least 1 liberal
on the court says up front she will not check her personal beliefs at the
door." -lost in DCThat seems like a pretty bizarre
interpretation of Justice Sotomayor's purported statement. I think she was
essentially saying that diversity is a desirable trait for the SCOTUS to have.
BluedevilThank you. FDR’s intended approach was to use numbers to
get what he wanted. the intent from the current crop of liberals is to use
numbers to overcome the results of the last election, democracy deshmockracy in
their eyes if it gets in their way. We see by the horrible Roe v
Wade decision that the impact is not short tenured. It is hard to get the court
to reverse itself. I suspect you can name more, but Dred Scott and
“separate but equal” (I forget the name of the actual case, was it
Brown v the Board?) are the only two that come to mind for me. Trump’s nominees have dissented from each other. What is much more rare
is seeing any type of dissension from the liberals on the bench – it does
occur, but rarely.Imp7 says they should check their personal beliefs
at the door, and I agree with him (for once). But wasn’t it Sotomayor who
said the court NEEDED the views of a Puerto Rican female? (or something of the
sort), so obviously at least 1 liberal on the court says up front she will not
check her personal beliefs at the door.
Just a thought, but I think it was the White Horse prophesy that said in the
last days the constitution would "hang by a thread". Today we see well
intentioned people attacking almost every right we are guaranteed by the
Constitution, such as the right to bear arms, free speech, the right to choose
who we will do business with, rent to, or even vote for. EVERYBODY
discriminates in one way or another, and that is perfectly fine, since it
guarantees our freedom to choose. The problem arises when some people feel
their "rights" to make their choices supersedes the "rights of
others" to make dissimilar choices.
The torch has been passed.
Orin may be gone but he still knows which buttons to push.Religious
liberty?Dangerous ideas?The guy Americans fear is the
integrity, ethics, morally challenged republican currently occupying the WH. The same guy Orrin and other republicans say is the best there ever was.
Justice Hugo Black wrote the "big wall between Church and State"
judgement that had nothing to do with the original intent of the Framers of the
Constitution. Hatch is right. It is freedom to exercise ones religion without
interference from the Federal government, not freedom from religion. The
Federal government, including the Supreme Court, is not supposed to promote one
religion over another. They have no authority to shut down peoples or
communities free exercise of religion.
Orrin, the antipathy isn't towards "religious liberty", the
antipathy is against bigotry using religion as an excuse. When you allow
discrimination in the name of "religious liberty" against one group of
people, you MUST allow it against ANY group of people - otherwise, you place the
one belief above the others, thus establishing a government religion.
Lost.... the ultimate goal of "court packing" was by FDR to change the
current ratio of a given court to reflect the then Presidents bias. Whether
that number is 9, 15, or even 99.... what is important is the ratios of
conservative versus progressive people sitting on the court. The actual number
doesn't really matter. And over time will be deflected by future
administrations.And what is more ironic is the two nominee's
that Trump had seated in the Supreme court have had dissenting opinions from
each other several times so far. Fortunately most of the people seated on the
court have been willing to be open minded on cases. Some have been
consistently unmoved in their opinions regardless - Clarance Thomas being one.
But most have surprised at one time or another. Bottom line any
discussion of FDR style "packing" would be very short in their impact,
and would just mean congress spends more time confirming nominations... but the
end result would likely be muted.
@sman - columbia, MSApril 10, 2019 12:24 p.m.The Reason the Left and
Right share no core principles, is becouse We have taking out anything Positive
about our country in our Schools. WE did away with the pledge of Allegiance and
School Prayer.WHERE do you get your information? Or lack of
information? Schools, in both Utah and Mississippi (even in Columbia) recite the
Pledge in class. It's no longer mandatory that kids participate. They can
opt out without penalty. Most schools have silent prayer time where kids can
pray-or not. BTW. You, and most Republicans would be the first one's
screaming if school kids were forced to pray to Allah, Buddha, Krishna, etc. No
one is stopping anyone from praying in school. The courts stopped schools from
forcing kids to pray in school. Our country is not hurting because of what
happens in schools. It's hurting because of the people we've elected
The Reason the Left and Right share no core principles, is becouse We have
taking out anything Positive about our country in our Schools. WE did away with
the pledge of Allegiance and School Prayer. Everything today is met with
scepticism Country and God.
What's gotten lost in the shuttle, is their actual job description and
qualifications. Judges are human. They all have personal views on many facets.
However, they are supposedly required to check their personal views at the
courthouse door. They are supposed to rule on the law. Period. There should be
no Republican or Democratic judges. No Jewish, Catholic or Mormon judges. No Pro
choice or anti-abortion judges. Just judges. Justice is supposed to be blind.
But, recently that's not the case. Time to get politics and religion out of
the justice system.
Mr. Hatch,Of course, it is your right to say whatever you want about
whatever topic you want to address; but let's be perfectly clear —
you have no moral authority whatsoever on the topic of the judiciary in general,
and the Supreme Court in particular. Your unconscionable, hyper-partisan
actions with regard to Merrick Garland obliterated any moral integrity you
might have previously had.Your blatant fear-mongering is not
justified, either; the Supreme Court has generally done a good job of balancing
the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause, and of generally ensuring
that religious freedom is protected, while also addressing in a reasonably
equitable and even-handed way issues where there are apparent conflicts between
religious freedom and other rights. This is not likely to change, whether there
are 9, or 11, or 13 Justices, as long as their records show them to be generally
qualified and fair.Sadly, you just can't seem to resist the
temptation of trying to place your thumb on the scales of justice, even after
the parade has passed you by.
The former Senator Orrin Hatch may have had a strong argument against
court-packing that is until the U.S. Senate changed its own long-standing
tradition of the filibuster using what is called the "nuclear option."
Now that only a majority of the U.S. Senate is required to confirm a U.S.
federal judge, the long history of necessarily bi-partisan candidates making for
balanced judicial appointments, there will a growing need to re-balance the
federal court system as one political party will now be able to pack the
judicial system with political appointees. Until a U.S. Constitutional
amendment is passed to bring back the filibuster to the U.S. Senate, it will be
necessary to bring more reasonable fairness to the U.S. Supreme Court by
re-balancing the Court from recently drastically altered process introduced
originally by the Democrats and now significantly pushed by Republican in
getting partisan judges onto the U.S. Supreme Court and elsewhere in the federal
FlipphoneNothing is more dangerous for America than The Democrat party
moving further to the left.Or for the Republican Party moving
farther to the right.
"Religious Liberty/Freedom" to guys like Hatch is code word to allow
religious organizations to discriminate against those that they deem unworthy.
Please tell us that Hatch's opinions are not going to become a regular item
in the D-News. Most didn't believe what he told us in his 42 years in
Congress. Not going to start now
"I have spent a lifetime defending religious liberty in the public
square.”Your vote to confirm RBG belies that statementOne real threat to religious liberty is kamala harris and others of her
ilk, who think membership in a catholic service organization (Knights of
Columbus), disqualifies someone from a federal judgeshipBigger
BubbaBen can only do what nancy gives him permission to doLDS
2Did you not read the article? Are you unaware of how court packing works?
It deals with increasing the number of justices on the SCOTUS, not the
conservative/ liberal nature of the justices appointed to fill vacancies. As BO
infamously said, elections have consequences.MAGA – I suppose
you chose to ignore all the news reports showing how well the economy has done
under trump – see my posts on other threads for citations from the AP,
CNBC, WSJ, and othersTJefferson, frozenGarland? You mean doing
what Biden suggested?BluedevilAgain, packing the court does
not refer to nominating those with a certain viewpoint to the bench, but
increasing the size of the bench in order to overcome opposing viewpoints.
Garland not being confirmed was not court packing, but doing what Joe said
Hatch even gave the most praise from Republicans of Merrick Garland as a
potential nominee before going along with the plan to refuse a vote on anyone as
a means of stealing a seat. He has no moral authority on this issue.
Nothing is more dangerous for America than The Democrat party moving further to
There are big problems in America. The Left and the Right don’t share the
same core values any more. That is why there is this call from the Left to
amend the Constitution. These shared values allowed for compromise in the
past.We are transforming from a moral society to an immoral one. 60
years ago most everyone could agree on families, our freedom of religion, our
freedom to bear arms, our freedom of assembly, and our freedom of speech.Now we have those who don’t believe in any of these things. These
people believe that they are so right in their views that they want to stop
discussion - violently in some cases.Americans are criticizing
everyone and everything.People are redefining things that are
abhorrent as good and acceptable.Yelling, screaming, spitting,
pushing, kicking, lying, and shouting obscenities is becoming the new norm.
National politicians are encouraging others to verbally assault others in public
places. Politicians are talking about feelings as if they are facts,
obfuscating to the public about their political enemies.Only with
respect, civility, and courtesy in any discourse can both sides of any matter
come to understanding and compromise.
Those of you invoking Merrick Garland- you have Joe Biden to thank for that.
AKA the “Biden Rule”."Some will criticize such a decision
and say it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in the
hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it. But that would not be our
intention, Mr. President, if that were the course we were to choose in the
Senate — to not consider holding hearings until after the election.
Instead, it would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is
under way, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until
after the election campaign is over....some people "may fret that this
approach would leave the Court with only eight members for some time. But as I
see it, Mr. President, the cost of such a result, the need to reargue three or
four cases that will divide the justices four to four are quite minor compared
to the cost that a nominee, the president, the senate, and the nation would have
to pay for what would assuredly be a bitter fight, no matter how good a person
is nominated by the President, if that nomination were to take place in the next
This op-ed is utter nonsense. The talk to change the composition of the Supreme
Court, an initiative that will go nowhere, has nothing to do with religious
liberty. Hatch is throwing out a red-herring. What Hatch wants is to protect
certain religious interests, not to ensure true religious freedom. This op-ed
is devious and deceptive. As an aside, if you look at the history of Court
decisions, expanding individual freedom from government intervention and large
corporate interests has come less from the conservative eras of the Court than
from the liberal eras. Hatch is trying to appropriate those gains for his right
wing cause. Don't be deceived.
Orin, I want to take you seriously. I too want to ensure people of all
religious conscience have their rights to believe, or not believe, protected.
But then you go off on this rant about "packing" the courts. This with
the context that most of the religious right voted for Trump for the very
specific purpose of packing the court. In fact it was you, who by your own
adminssion was a highly qualified candidate to the Supreme Court, blocked
Presidents Obama's rightful pick to the court..... with the expressed and
admitted intention to shift the courts direction.You yourself have
overtly acted to shape the courts by "packing" them with people who you
felt would oppose another groups opinion. So to say "court packing" is
a problem, when you yourself practiced this very same ploy, rings hollow. I support your quest to ensure all people of faith have religious
freedom. But I dislike the hypocrisy of your actions here. Packing the courts
can be wrong situationally. It needs to be wrong whomever or whenever.
Amen, Hatch! The progressives are on a steady march for government to enshrine
into law everything from gay marriage, infanticide, and the retraction of
individual rights. Their arrogance and lack of self worth are plied to destroy
good and reward evil. For them, religious liberty, the bedrock of American
liberty and freedom, can only be seen through the eyes of Socialistic thought
and action, not as an individual right. The only way to achieve their ends is
to destroy thoughts that are inimical to that end, religious freedom. The state
is all that matters. Trump 2020. Lee 2022. Romney, we will see!
Orrin, kindly stay silent. Your opinions are no longer valued or valid.
You've shown your hypocrisy on literally every issue, and now I shall add
this one to the list. You've absolutely invalidated yourself. Stay out in
the pasture, buddy. Thank you, Your eternally disappointed constituent.
Bigger Bubba,Interesting, and you don't think the Republicans
do the same thing. American politics is a business, not a government. The
politicians and their politics are in it for the money and wonderful life style,
not so much to service the nation or the people. It is a competition of Walmart
and Target. One has to fight for the discounts to stay alive.
'Advice' from orrin about fairness in the USSC rings hollow after what
they did to Merrik Garland. But then orrin has never been one to
take his own advice. Lifetime politicians like him are the problem, not the
solution. We were foolish to elect him the first time, let alone the next
Hypocrisy, thy name is Hatch.And thy party is the GOP, who have been
explicit about "court packing" for at least the past two elections,
including denying nominated Merrick Garland a hearing!Like your
Leader, Mr Trump, the GOP is brazen about violating ethics and laws and thumbing
their noses at the Constitution and the Institutions that have kept this country
free and great!MAGA my eye!
Excellent Senator Hatch. I appreciate your unwavering support of religious
freedom demonstrated while in office, and now having retired. I'd love to
read transcripts of the talks given at your upcoming symposium.
When Dems are not in power, some of them want to change the rules so that they
can win next time (e.g., court packing, popular vote, etc.). Very juvenile.
Let's hope that Ben McAdams brings some sanity to the party.