Trump Says He’d Consider Bill Pryor for Supreme Court, AG Who Prosecuted ‘Ten Commandments’ Judge


**Trump Says He’d Consider Bill Pryor for Supreme Court, AG Who Prosecuted ‘Ten Commandments’ Judge **

CHARLESTON, S.C. — During Saturday night’s Republican presidential debate in South Carolina, Donald Trump said that if he were to nominate a judge to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, he would consider Diane Sykes or Bill Pryor, the latter of which prosecuted “Ten Commandments Judge” Roy Moore.

“If I were president now, I would certainly want to try and nominate a justice. And I’m absolutely sure that president Obama will try and do it,” he said in light of Scalia’s sudden death Friday night. “I hope that our Senate, Mitch and the entire group, is going to be able to do something about it in terms of delay.”

“We could have a Diane Sykes or a Bill Pryor,” he added, providing examples of who he would nominate if he were president. “We have some fantastic people.”

Bill Pryor, the former attorney general of Alabama, prosecuted Roy Moore in 2003 over his refusal to remove a Ten Commandments monument from the rotunda of the Alabama Supreme Court. Pryor’s comments to Moore during his trial focused more on Moore’s refusal to stop acknowledging God as chief justice.


I hope all the Christian conservatives who are planning on voting for Trump give this some serious thought.




There will be much more to discuss about these two judges. In the article linked from OP, Trump mentioned Diane Sykes but at the end of article it was switched to Wanda Sykes, who is really a comedian. The writer and editor made a huge mistake and didn’t bother checking the names.

In the following article, Bill Pryor described Roe versus Wade as “worst abomination in the history of constitutional law.”

Trump is the only candidate gutsy enough to put out actual names for possible nomination. Now people are going to investigate who these judges are and whether they are conservative. The OP article seems like a hit piece but unfortunately even the names are messed up.


Thanks. Well, this shows why it is important to discuss these things, now, maybe one can wonder if Pryor indeed, would be a good nomination.


More details on Bill Pryor. He is a catholic.

Many good details on the “ten commandments” case and his reasons for judging the case.


Diane Sykes’ judicial philosophy:

“I saw that the philosophical bent of the court was going to be an issue,” she says. “I felt I had something to contribute in that area, as well.” Throughout her judicial career, Sykes has adhered to a conservative judicial philosophy, which she describes as rooted in the principles of separation of powers and judicial restraint. “I will try very hard not to be a results-oriented jurist,” she says, “who figures out how he or she wants the case to come out and then makes the law fit that result. Rather, I’ll start at the beginning of the legal analysis and work outward from there.”


And when people mention Trump’s sister? She’s 79 years old, the same age Judge Scalia was so, it is highly doubtful he’d nominate her to the Supreme Court. Reagan also is the one that appointed Trump’s sister though she may have voted liberally on some issues.

This is why it probably is important to thoroughly discuss these issues.


Trump said on last Sunday’s interview (forget which channel) that it’s not possible to nominate his sister because of conflict of interest but she is brilliant. Of course he’s going to complement his own sister. No reason to tear her down and of course he’s not going to nominate her–will look bad in optics alone.


She is brilliant. And a lovely lady in every sense of the word.


So maybe Trump was referring to the late comedian, Richard Pryor?


That’s surprising to hear. On this site most of the time it’s trump bashing all the time. You must know the lady.:slight_smile:


“The Founding Fathers would LOVE me!” :smiley:

I’d take sight unseen anyone Trump would nominate over anyone Obama would nominate.


Both are very conservative, no question about that.


I hope people remember Trump is the only candidate so far that has given real names. Others might follow suit but Trump is the first one with guts to do so. If you look back at every major issue in this campaign season, trump has been the one doing the spearheading. He takes the hit from all sides, and then the other republican candidates sidle along to get close to his ideas. Take immigration for instance. Trump took all the heat and now Cruz and Rubio are both talking about building a wall.


This doesn’t necessarily show how intelligent Trump is (maybe clever, politically speaking), but rather how politically-driven and non-creative the other candidates, such as Cruz and Rubio, are.


Oh, so because Cruz or Rubio didn’t name who they might appoint that means they are “politically-driven” and “non-creative”?

Really? Were they asked this specific question during the debate? I don’t think so.

So, we should answer questions we aren’t asked? :rolleyes:

During Saturday night’s presidential debate in South Carolina, the billionaire listed two federal judges he thinks would be excellent picks to have on the Supreme Court — Diane Sykes and Bill Pryor, who were both nominated to the United States Court of Appeals by President George W. Bush.
Free Sign Up CP Newsletter!


I would hate to be judged in such a manner.

Did Rubio and Cruz answer the question asked to them, “Oh, I don’t know”.

This seems to be very unfair.


My reference was to the immigration comment, particularly the building of a wall, brought up by the previous poster. It was due to Trump’s talking about this that the other candidates, such as Cruz and Rubio, jumped on board.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit