Conservatives Already Battling Over Possible Trump SCOTUS Pick

With Donald Trump expected to name his Supreme Court nominee in the coming weeks, conservative voices are already starting to fight over one of the figures believed to be at or near the top of Trump’s list.

According to multiple reports, Federal Appeals Court Judge William Pryor is in the final group of names from Trump’s campaign list of potential Supreme Court that the president-elect is considering.

The news excites many on the right.  John Malcolm of the Heritage Foundation says Pryor “calls it like he sees it” and “has a titanium spine.”

But others on the right see Pryor as a political opportunist who preaches values while stiff-arming them from the bench.

Public Advocate President Eugene Delgaudio is leading the fight against Pryor.  He says Pryor’s actions connected to the unseating of Alabama Chief Judge Roy Moore in 2003 make him unfit for the highest court in the land.

“I believe William Pryor is not a man we can trust on the Supreme Court.  My belief is he is an opportunist, an anti-God type of guy who doesn’t mind showing his disdain for godly values,” said Delgaudio.

At issue is Pryor’s role in removing Moore from office in 2003 after Moore defied federal courts and refused to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the courthouse.  Pryor stated that he believed the monument should have been allowed to stay but said the federal court ruling against Moore needed to be enforced.  Pryor later personally led the effort to prosecute Moore for violating the canons of judicial ethics in Alabama.  That effort led to Moore being removed from the bench.

“Instead of protecting the Constitution, whether it be the state constitution or the U.S. Constitution, he simply took his political opportunity and stabbed Mr. Moore (in the back).  And the basis for that backstabbing is now the wrongful basis for the current litigation that removes him again,” said Delgaudio.

He’s referring to the latest legal battle over Moore, who was elected back to his old position by the people of Alabama.  In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2015 decision on same-sex marriage, Moore instructed probate judges around the state that they did not have to enforce the ruling and feel compelled to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

“All he did was issue a legal brief advising his colleagues in the Alabama court that they should wait for an actual ruling from a lower court or a legislative branch before they acted as if they were instructed to do something,” said Delgaudio.

“This is called a simple legal advisory, which is a cornerstone of all judicial temperament,” said Delgaudio.  “So for following his constitutional oath in advising people how to follow the constitution and the Alabama constitution, he was removed.  Again, this goes back to the temperament of Judge Pryor.”

Public Advocate is actively involved in defending Moore in the latest case, filing a friend of the court brief in defense of the judge.

“Our amicus brief pointed out that the justification by Mr. Pryor was based on faulty reasoning and the ethics tribunal this time referred to [the 2003] judicial proceeding,” said Delgaudio.

Delgaudio says he’s not alone.  He notes that libertarians at Reason magazine are also wary of Pryor for his proclivity towards judicial deference, meaning states especially are given the benefit of the doubt when their laws are challenged in court.

He says conservatives will relive the John Roberts experience if Pryor is named to the court.

“I did oppose Judge Roberts and predicted that he was a weasel.  Alone in the conservative movement I could say I told you so.  In that context, if you want a weasel, Judge Pryor is a weasel and he’ll betray us,” said Delgaudio.

Delgaudio says he would be fine with any other judge on Trump’s list.