Battle for Supreme Court Already Underway? Trump Meets with Pryor

President-elect Donald Trump reportedly met with Judge William Pryor about the possibility of serving on the United States Supreme Court.

Above the Law reports they met late Saturday at Trump Tower. Their article explores Pryors judicial and public service history along with the likelihood of Pryor being nominated and confirmed.  

Trump had already said he planned to name a nominee in late January. 

Many Americans told pollsters they voted for Donald Trump just because of their worry of what damage a more liberal Supreme Court could do in years and decades ahead.

Curt Levey of Freedomworks and the Committee for Justice told CBN News, "People were particularly sick of liberal judicial activism."

The Heritage Foundations's John Malcolm added, "About 2-to-1 or 3-to-1, those people who put the Supreme Court on the top of their list tended to break for Donald Trump."

Groups advising the incoming administration on court nominees are offering their opinions about those now on the president-elect's short list to replace Justice Antonin Scalia who died last February.

Labeled Roe v. Wade 'worst abomination'

Malcolm, who contributed several names to that short list, told CBN News federal appeals court judge William Pryor is a favorite among pro-lifers for blasting the high court on its 1973 ruling that legalized abortion nationwide.

"Before he became a judge, he wrote an article in which he referred to Roe v Wade as the 'worst abomination in the history of constitutional law,'" Malcolm said.

Levey pointed out Pryor himself faced blasting when the Senate fought over confirming him as a federal judge.

"Some of the Democrats basically accused him of being too Catholic," the Committee for Justice attorney recalled.  "And we took out ads saying 'Catholics need not apply.'"

Dems won't be psyched for Sykes

Malcolm and Levey both had praise for federal appeals court judge Diane Sykes and warn she'll face opposition.

"She's a solid conservative – very bright," Levey stated.  "Both of those alone are enough to make Democrats come after her."

"She has a long track record and has certainly written a number of opinions that've pleased conservatives," Malcolm said.  "So I'm sure the Democrats would come up with some way to attack her if she's the nominee."

Scalia clerk could become Scalia replacement

Both judicial experts also talked about 48-year-old Michigan justice Joan Larsen, who actually clerked for the now-deceased Scalia.

"She was highly admired by all the Scalia clerks," Malcolm said.

Levey added, "Larsen's also a state court judge, which if you're looking for a little diversity on the Court, would be nice since none of the people on there now come from state courts." 

"The fact that all of her fellow Scalia clerks, who probably many of them are conservatives, think highly of her says something about her judicial philosophy," Malcolm explained.

From cabbie to federal judge

Then there's the young pro-Second Amendment federal appeals court judge Thomas Hardiman, who used to drive a taxi while in law school.

"Interesting story: grew up in a family of very, very modest means," Malcolm said of Hardiman.  "I don't think that his parents went to college.  He put himself through law school and possibly college as well driving a taxicab."

Democrats, such as their new Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer, have sworn stiff opposition to virtually any Trump nominee. 

Levey recalled what Schumer has stated in the past: "'I don't care how qualified you are, just the fact that you're conservative is reason enough to oppose you.'  Schumer's on that list of Democrats who've said that."

Dems likely to get 'nuked'

Malcolm said of the top Democrat, "I think he will certainly try to obstruct any nomination."

The problem, though, is since when they were the majority, Senate Democrats used the so-called "nuclear option" to stop the GOP minority from blocking Obama nominees, Dems are likely to face that themselves now that they're the minority.

"Well, the shoe is somewhat on the other foot," Malcolm said.

Levey said of the Senate Dems, "At the end of the day, if they try to filibuster, Republicans will use the nuclear option."

'Bigot' no matter who they are

Still, Levey is betting those Democrats will try roasting with rhetoric everyone who Trump nominates in the years ahead, and surely accuse all of them of some sort of bigotry.
 
"I don't mean they'll really be a bigot," Levey explained.  "But Democrats will say they're insensitive to minorities, women, women who need abortions, gay rights, whatever -- they'll find something."

It's likely Republicans would have fought just as hard if Hillary Clinton had won the presidency.

Conservatives who voted for Trump, specifically because of the Supreme Court, have said it was really important to stop Clinton from taking the Oval Office because of the nominees she would have sent up for the high court.

"Then we would have five liberal votes on the court," Levey said, "and virtually all the gains of the last few decades would be lost."

Stakes couldn't be higher

Malcolm pointed out the stakes truly are high, explaining, "There are only nine of these people who sit on the Supreme Court, so every vote counts.  The most important legal issues of the day sooner or later work their way up to the Supreme Court."

He summed up, "These people can potentially serve for a very, very long time and influence the law for decades if not generations to come."