Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland met with his first Republican senator Tuesday as his nomination gained at least the appearance of momentum, aided by high-profile conservative voices, public pressure and a high court ruling affected by the lack of a ninth justice.

Judge Garland met with Sen. Mark Kirk, a Republican up for re-election in blue-state Illinois. Mr. Kirk is among 16 Republican senators who now say they will hold courtesy meetings with the nominee, despite a vow by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, not to hold hearings or a confirmation vote on President Obama’s choice to replace the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.

Mr. Kirk, one of the most endangered incumbent Republicans this year, told reporters before the meeting that he wants to be open-minded about the nomination.

“I think when you just say, ‘I’m not going to meet with him at all,’ that’s too closed-minded,” he said.

The senator and the nominee met after a respected conservative lawyer and former George W. Bush nominee, Miguel Estrada, shot holes in assertions that Judge Garland is hostile to the Second Amendment. Mr. Estrada told NPR that evidence used to portray him as anti-gun is “thin to nonexistent.”

Mr. Estrada said the rules allow judges to rehear cases “of exceptional importance.” Because no federal appeals court had ever ruled that there was an individual right to own a gun, he said, the case was clearly of exceptional importance.

The Supreme Court later upheld the lower court’s decision in a landmark ruling.

Progressive activists also pointed to a high court ruling Tuesday, a 4-4 split, which upheld a lower-court ruling favorable to teachers unions, as another indication of the need to fill the court vacancy. Although Judge Garland could not have been confirmed and seated in time to make a difference in the case, liberals said it was an unsatisfactory example of how the Supreme Court would be forced to operate for a year or more without Mr. Obama’s appointee.

Judge Garland’s nomination also got a boost this week from a nationwide poll showing that a plurality of Americans — 46 percent — say the Senate should confirm him, compared with 30 percent who think he should be rejected and 24 percent who don’t know.

While these developments may be good news on the surface for the Garland nomination, there is no indication that any of it is having an impact on Mr. McConnell or Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican.

Another Republican lawmaker who has agreed to meet with Judge Garland, Sen. Susan M. Collins of Maine, said Tuesday that Mr. McConnell is “not real happy” with her. The moderate lawmaker said she is “a bit perplexed” by Mr. McConnell’s position.

“I know Sen. McConnell cares deeply about the balance of the court,” she told WGAN radio in Maine. “If the next president is a Democrat, then the balance could be tipped way further than Judge Garland, based on what I know about him so far. Let’s say that Hillary Clinton is the next president of the United States. I personally believe that she would be likely to choose a nominee who is to the left of Judge Garland.”

Activists point to Judge Garland’s vote in 2007 for a rehearing of a case involving the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns, in which a three-judge panel ruled for the first time that there is a constitutional right to own firearms for self-defense. The conservative Judicial Crisis Network has said Judge Garland’s vote suggests that he doesn’t believe the Second Amendment provides for gun ownership for personal protection.

She said Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump is “rather unpredictable.”

“Who knows who his nominee would be?” Ms. Collins said.

New Marquette Law School Poll finds Ted Cruz ahead in Wis GOP primary race, with 40% support to 30% for Trump, 21% for Kasich. #mulawpoll

— MULawPoll (@MULawPoll) March 30, 2016

Via @Schneider_CM, @MULawPoll poll
GOP vs. Hillary head-to-heads:

Kasich +9
Cruz tie
Trump down 10 & in the 30's.

— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) March 30, 2016

 whembly wrote:
Cruz is making noise in WI now...Interesting time...

 whembly wrote:
Cruz is making noise in WI now...

New Marquette Law School Poll finds Ted Cruz ahead in Wis GOP primary race, with 40% support to 30% for Trump, 21% for Kasich. #mulawpoll

— MULawPoll (@MULawPoll) March 30, 2016

and...

Via @Schneider_CM, @MULawPoll poll
GOP vs. Hillary head-to-heads:

Kasich +9
Cruz tie
Trump down 10 & in the 30's.

— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) March 30, 2016

Interesting time...

Traditio wrote:

 whembly wrote:
Cruz is making noise in WI now...Interesting time...

It's Wisconsin. A whole lot of protestant bible thumpers in Wisconsin, no?

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 skyth wrote:
Time to put another troll on the ignore list I believe.

Yeah, I did as well.

He's a rare bird around here and I don't think I've seen anyone else in a long time be so forthcoming with with their, um... Interesting views. Luckily, people like this tend not to stick around very long.

 jmurph wrote:
And now Grabgate is drawing calls from female conservative pundits for Lewandowski's removal:
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/conservative-female-media-trump/2016/03/30/id/721521/

Interesting that this issue seems to be hammering Trump harder than Cruz's affair scandal.

Traditio wrote:

feeder wrote:No, because that's an unattainable goal.

Unattainable in what sense? Politically? Physically? Logically?

Traditio wrote:

TheMeanDM wrote:Ok. That's clear.

They are asking to be burglarized.

As I've found myself saying dozens of times in this thread:

That's not what I said.

Liberals.

 TheMeanDM wrote:
Trump now calls for "some kind of punishment" for women that have an abortion.

1) legally recognized medical procedure
2) some already face mental anguish (self punishment) over the decision
3) some already face societal punishment in certain communities/areas of the country
4) some already face "punishment" by religious organizations

And 5)
[img]
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/65573858.jpg[/img]

 d-usa wrote:
Listening to the radio on my way to work, and this Lewandowski character really sounds like a handful.

His history include:

- Forgot he had an unloaded gun in his bag and carried it into an office building at the capitol. When the police confiscated it he sued to get it back, which was dismissed.
- He has a history of physical altercations with protesters at Trump rallies
- Apparently he served as a police officer for 6 months or so. So he should have known what charges he could expect for grabbing people. Almost makes me wonder if he still thinks he can act like a cop and get involved in physical fights instead of standing back.

 jasper76 wrote:
Trump's now saying if Roe v. Wade is ever overturned, women who have abortions should be punished. The punishment is not specified. I don't know whether he envisages fines, jail time, death, or whatever, but has any pro-life Presidential candidate ever advocated punishing women for abortions? I thought it the hypothetical scenario was always that the doctor would be punished, but not the women.

Anywho, this dude is one smooth ladies man

EDIT: Nevermind, now he has flip-flopped on that position...might be a new record. A couple hours?

http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/30/politics/donald-trump-abortion-town-hall/index.html

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
People just seem to be voting for the way he says it.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
People just seem to be voting for the way he says it.

Anecdotal, but I know of at least one person voted Trump because, "He pisses off all the people I don't like". So there may be some truth to that.

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
Just watching Trump talk for 5 minutes and he takes both sides of a position one sentence after another. He just spews meaningless nonsense. Literally do not understand how people can vote for him. I try to avoid watching him but on that Town hall he said Healthcare was the second most important responsibility of the federal government. Of course 5 seconds later he said the opposite but how can Republicans vote for someone who says that? Isn't the evil of Obamacare a big time Republican position? Somehow nothing he says actually matters. People just seem to be voting for the way he says it.

 Sinful Hero wrote:

 KamikazeCanuck wrote:
People just seem to be voting for the way he says it.

Anecdotal, but I know of at least one person voted Trump because, "He pisses off all the people I don't like". So there may be some truth to that.

 skyth wrote:
Nothing the Federal Government does is important to the Tea Party

 d-usa wrote:
Nuclear warming is the worst global warming. I hate nuclear. We don't need more countries getting nuclear weapons. We can't afford to protect these countries. They need to get nuclear weapons. Japan and South Korea need nuclear weapons. They need nuclear weapons. If more countries had nuclear weapons to protect themselves we would be better. More countries having nuclear weapons are a bad thing. Nuclear weapons are the biggest threat. It's time to let more countries have nuclear weapons.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 skyth wrote:
Time to put another troll on the ignore list I believe.

Yeah, I did as well.

He's a rare bird around here and I don't think I've seen anyone else in a long time be so forthcoming with with their, um... Interesting views. Luckily, people like this tend not to stick around very long.

 d-usa wrote:
Nuclear warming is the worst global warming. I hate nuclear. We don't need more countries getting nuclear weapons. We can't afford to protect these countries. They need to get nuclear weapons. Japan and South Korea need nuclear weapons. They need nuclear weapons. If more countries had nuclear weapons to protect themselves we would be better. More countries having nuclear weapons are a bad thing. Nuclear weapons are the biggest threat. It's time to let more countries have nuclear weapons.

Our Republican Primary frontrunner...