Monday, November 21, 2016

J’pura hospital chairman replies : ''Why was Duminda sent to SJGH when best neurosurgical unit is in Colombo?''

I have nothing to do with this racket !

(Lanka-e-News - 20.Nov.2016, 11.55PM) R. Duminda Silva the infamous murderer cum drug dealer now in the death row facing death sentence, charged with the brutal cold blooded murder of Baratha Lakshman and three others in broad daylight, and who through spurious diagnoses and feigning fake illnesses tried to get admitted to Jayawardenapura hospital was sent back without admission.

The chairman of the hospital , Dr.Athula Kahandaliyanage has written a letter (appended herein) to Lanka e news in an effort to exonerate himself of any blame fastened on him in this connection , and saying he has nothing to do with this racket .

On the 14 th Lanka e news reported under the caption

‘Conspiracy to smuggle out infamous criminal Duminda ! -Fudging judge, medical specialists and media coolie involved’ reported this news.

In that report it is the following paragraph which made reference to Dr. Kahandaliyanage :

‘Duminda who was dispatched to Jayawardenapura hospital on the 11 th was sent back however. The reason for this cited by Dr. Kahanda Liyanage was , the medical specialist Maheshi Wijeratne (who furnished a bogus medical certificate earlier on to send Duminda to Singapore is not in the Island and therefore medical treatment cannot be given. This course of action is most outrageous and abhorrent. Where on earth do such things take place and in which hospital in the world is a patient who is dispatched for treatment sent back without being treated just because a particular doctor is not there ? This clearly bears out that if by any another doctor examines Duminda , and states Duminda is not having any sickness , the entire conspiracy they are striving hard to conceal would be exposed, and the cat would be out of the bag. ‘

According to Kahandaliyanage , he along with his family and some friends were in Mannar ( in an Islet) on holiday on the day (11th Nov.) Duminda was sent back by Jayawardena hospital ,and that he went to Mannar on the 10 th and returned to Colombo on the 14 th (Monday night).

Hence Duminda Silva was sent back not by him , and it was by Dr. Susitha Senaratne ( Hospital Director) and Dr.Santhusha Fernando (Assist. Director) , and Kahandaliyanage was informed about it later via phone, Dr. Kahandaliyanage had stated.

Duminda was dispatched to be admitted to the neuro ward of Jayawardenapura hospital of most notorious doctor Ms. Maheshi Wijeratne . Since the latter was overseas , the patient was sent back without admission , and the Director of the hospital has informed that to Kahandaliyanage .

Kahandaliyanage who approved the refusal of admission , says there was nothing conspiratorial as reported by Lanka e news.

However he went on to clarify , when there are hospitals to treat prisoners who are sentenced , it is the policy of Jayawardenapura hospital , a fee levying semi private hospital not to treat such prisoners. No prisoner who is sentenced by court has ever been brought to Jayawardenapura hospital for treatment in its history , he asserted.

Moreover , while there is the National hospital ,Colombo which is in close proximity to the prison hospital, and a state of the art newly established neurosurgical unit is there in the National hospital , there is no necessity at all for a prisoner to be dispatched to Jayawardena hospital .There are four neurosurgeons working 24 hours of the day at the National hospital whereas Jayawardenapura hospital has only one neurosurgeon , and that is Dr. Ms. Maheshi Wijeratne, she has pointed out .

Besides , the employees of his hospital are even reluctant to admit remand prisoners for medical treatment because they cannot shoulder the responsibility of providing security to them , Kahandaliyanage has elaborated.

Kahandaliyanage who says he has nothing to do with the conspiracy linked to most infamous criminal and heroin Kingpin Duminda Silva , also stated , on the first occasion when Duminda was brought to Jayawardenapura hospital for treatment too, he was not in the Island, let alone in Jayawardenapura hospital. At that time he was working as a Director for the WHO/South East Asia Regional Office, Delhi, India from February 2010 till February 2014, he has stated in his letter.

Lanka e news footnote

We must thank Dr. Kahandaliyanage for the explanation offered and revealing the facts to the public from his perspective in connection with the refusal to accept Duminda Silva , and if he says he is not involved in the conspiracy , we shall accept his position.

Yet , the question raised by Lanka e news in our earlier report has not been answered . That is ,if and when Dr. Maheshi who was a party to the conspiracy regarding Duminda’s sickness from the beginning was not available , and say another doctor had taken up the case and confirmed that Duminda is not suffering from such a grave disease ?

This is because it was possible for the Jayawardenapura hospital to accept the patient duly ,and diagnose his actual sickness (not feigned) , if any , and transferred the patient back to the National hospital .

In any event , after Jayawardenapura hospital refusing to accept ’sick’ Duminda , and the subsequent exposure of Lanka e news , Duminda having been cured now is a matter for surprise and is most perplexing because Duminda was supposedly in a terribly sick state with the prison hospital unable to treat him on the 11 th, and Jayawardenapura hospital too refusing to accept him . Strangely the corrupt scoundrels in the prison also had taken no action to admit ‘serious’ Duminda to any other hospital. Yet unbelievably ‘critical’ Duminda is now cured .

Kahandaliyanage deserves a special pat on the back if he has cured that patient without treatment .

Connected report
‘Conspiracy to smuggle out infamous criminal Duminda ! -Fudging judge, medical specialists and media coolie involved’

Dr Kahandaliyange's Letter as follows

Dear Chief Editor Sandaruwan,

I am a regular visitor to your web site. I had a lot of faith in the credibility of the substance you publish. But now I have my doubts about it with my personal first hand experience with regard to the following.

This refers to the article that you published regarding the death row prisoner Duminda de Silva, who was taken to Sri JayawardenepuraHospital (SJGH) and refused admission on or around 11 Nov 2016.

I am, Dr. Athula Kahandaliyanage, Chairman of SJGH and I have been implicated in your article as getting involved in a conspiracy to smuggle out this prisoner and also that as a part of that conspiracy I refused the prisoner admission to SJGH the ward on 11 November.

I wish to bring to your notice that I was no-where in Jayawardenepura or even in Colombo when this drama happened at SJGH. I was in fact in Mannar Island with my family and friends on holiday from 10th night and returned on Monday, the 14th which was the the Poya holiday).

I was not aware of it till I heard it from a friend on 10th night. I called the Director, Dr. Susitha Senaratne on my way to Mannar, to verify what it was all about and learnt that the Deputy Director and Director had already addressed the issue.

The Director said that the prisoner Duminda de Silva was brought to be admitted to the Neuro Surgeon Dr Wijeratne's ward at SJGH. Since Dr Wijerathna was overseas Dr Senaratna who was present in the hospital at that time has refused to accept the prisoner as there was no neurosurgeon to treat him at that time. Therefore Dr Senaratna has sent the prisoner back, which I agreed was the right thing to do at that moment.

I advised the Director and the Deputy Director that a convicted prisoner cannot be admitted to SJGH because the accepted policy and what is practiced is that convicted prisoners are admitted to the Government General Hospital where the required speciality is available. On the other hand the management is of the view that SJGH being a fee levying semi- private hospital we cannot take the responsibility about such a prisoner's safety and security.

In this case the prisoner should have been referred by the prison authorities to the National Hospital where the best Neurosurgical unit in the country with more than four Neurosurgeons are available to give the best care to the prisoner. This is what usually done by the prison authorities for other prisoners.

Furthermore the Prison authorities should have first contacted the Director SJGH and asked for permission to send the patient to SJGH. Had they done so this problem would not have arisen.

Hence your news item is factually incorrect, and not credible at all. You can verify from hospital staff, the Director, Dr Senaratna or Deputy Director, Dr Santhushya Fernando who would give you the correct picture.

I also wish to add that I was not associated with this patient's treatment provided at SJGH in the previous occasion too since I was out of the country, working as a Director for the WHO/South East Asia Regional Office, Delhi, India from February 2010 till February 2014.

This article has brought in very serious implications against my image and profession. I also would like to state that as a regular visitor to your site I would expect the site to carry credible news.

I sincerely hope that you verify the credibility of my claim and take suitable action soon

Dr. Athula Kahandaliyanage
Chairman, SJGH
Sent from my iPad

---------------------------
by (2016-11-21 05:43:05)

Sri Lanka: Opposition Plotting Military Coup D’éta ?

( November 21, 2016, Colombo, Sri Lanka Guardian) Joint Opposition ( JO) and MEP Leader Dinesh Gunawardena, in Parliament, on Saturday, warned that there might be a military coup if the government didn’t take immediate action to arrest the rapid deterioration of democracy in the country.

Participating in the third reading of budget debate on the expenditure of heads of the President’s and Prime Minister’s offices, the JO leader said that democratic values were eroding under the present regime. When the JO leader made the warning, President Maithripala Sirisena, too, was in Parliament.

“Although the government members boast of pruning of powers of the executive presidency, the post has gained some more powers. None in this country will approve of the way the government attacked disabled ex-servicemen,” MP Gunawardena said, requesting the government not to allow repetition of such unfortunate incidents.

“The government has not given the Joint Opposition the status it deserves in Parliament. Our privileges have been breached. We have been deprived of our rights as representatives of the people. We are not given due time in debates and thereby our voice has been suppressed.

“When you deprive the Opposition of its democratic rights democracy suffers. You do not hold elections. How can one say this country is democratic when you keep postponing elections in this manner?

“Does the Financial Crimes Investigation Division act according to the principles of democracy? The FCID follows the orders issued to them by a committee functioning under the Prime Minister. If this situation continues destroying democracy, soon there could be a military coup.”

Deputy Minister of Social Empowerment and Welfare Ranjan Ramanayake: “You are talking of the failed coup attempt of Jan 08, 2015. We have information that several others including Mohan Peiris, Daya Ratnayake, Karunaratne Hangawatte and Udaya Gammanpila plotted on that night to launch a military coup so stay in power. Fortunately, our war heroes did not fall in line. We do not think our security forces can be used for a such a disgraceful act.”

Meanwhile a retired General who has just released his memoir stressed the moral power of the military intelligence and other forces have been eliminated by the ruling government.

“Intelligence services in this country has been dismantle and the crime rate in many places are skyrocketing”, he warmed in a public gathering recently.

However, the military coup talk by Dinesh Gunawardena is a clear conspiracy by him and others in the joint opposition, charges minister S.B. Dissanayake.

Our military has not fallen to a low of resorting to a plot, and the JO’s talk is a serious insult to the military and the nation, he told the media in Colombo.

Ever if a military coup occurs as claimed, India will help to take care of it very easily, he added.

State awaiting AG instructions on COPE report

“I have done my duty,” PM tells Parliament

Advice on bond issue was sought from IMF and World Bank

Tuesday, 22 November 2016

Prime Minister Ranil Wickremesinghe yesterday informed Parliament that he will decide the course of action to be taken on the controversial Treasury bond issue after the Attorney General Department gives instructions on the matter, stressing that he has done his duty.

The Prime Minister invited the Opposition to handover the file to any legal expert they select, provided all party leaders agree, if they are not happy with the instructions from the AG.

“I did my best as the Prime Minister and the minister responsible. Now it is up to the House to decide any alternative,” he said,

Prime Minister

Ranil Wickremesinghe

speaking during the Budget 2017 third reading debate.

Wickremesighe, responding to MP Wasudewa Nanayakkara’s accusation that the Prime Minister was influencing the process, highlighted that for the first time, action on a COPE report was taken within a year.

“How many times have we been demanding investigations on Hedging and Greek Bonds issues. Nothing had been done. We appointed the Pitipana Committee to investigate the Treasury bond issue. When the report came D. E. W. Gunasekera said it was a UNP committee and that the report was not acceptable. Then COPE headed by MP Sunil Handunnetti investigated it and issued a report. Everybody accepts that report. I am thankful to MP Handunnetti. The committee report came up with recommendations. I acted in accordance with those recommendations. Then the House had been told to hand over these recommendations to a legal body.”

The Premier stressed that the State takes legal advice from Attorney General on all matters relating to governance, except with regard to matters pertaining to privilege issues. The Attorney General has instructed the Government to obtain expert knowledge on public auction and private placement methods, he said.

“I wrote to the IMF and the World Bank. There is no point asking others for instructions. My duty was to hand over the issue to this House. The COPE is a committee of this House. You cannot file a case without amending laws if the Attorney General permits it. You could file a case but that would yield no results. If you do not like that procedure, you could obtain the services of a legal expert of your choice.”

Highlighting that there are 37 COPE reports, which came before the report on the alleged bond scam, Wickremesinghe said that his Government would take action on these reports as well.

“There should be no further delay. Otherwise I would be accused of delaying them,” he said.

Earlier in the debate, MP Wasudewa Nanayakkara accused Prime Minister Wickremesinghe of delaying the Bond sales investigations. He claimed that investigations will not continue as long as the Prime Minister held his position. Nanayakkara also said that the AG’s department (which has been tasked with advising the State on possible legal action on the report), also works on the Prime Minister’s advice, and called for his resignation.

Dilan battles for presidential commission on bond scam

SLFP front-liner makes appeal during lengthy speech in P’ment, seeks to unify SLFP on bond scam Insists properly
empowered presidential commission best chance of justice
Says different sides engaged in “whitewashing” uncle or son-in-law but unfocused on solutions

State Minister of Highways Dilan Perera yesterday called on opposition parliamentarians to make a collective push to appoint an empowered presidential commission to comprehensively investigate and take legal action on the alleged bond scam.

Speaking at length in parliament, Perera sought to find middle ground on the acrimonious issue and, for the first time inside the House, openly advocated a presidential commission as the best avenue to push for a comprehensive investigation.

Reaching out to his detractors in the Joint Opposition, Perera appealed to them to support Sri Lanka Freedom Party (SLFP) efforts to encourage President Maithripala Sirisena to appoint a presidential commission following charges that the move to send the Committee on Public Enterprises (CoPE) report to the Attorney General was a delaying tactic.

“I have to speak the truth here. There is one faction whitewashing the uncle and one faction whitewashing the son-in-law. I’m asking Joint Opposition members to stop whitewashing the son-in-law and come to a common agreement with us. What are you trying to hide? We have all bumped into the son-in-law enough times at Temple Trees,” he told his fellow members.

Perera is also one of the 11-member committee appointed by President Sirisena to study the CoPE report submitted to parliament last month to recommend future steps to Sirisena. In his extensive speech, Perera also dwelt on a previous request by the Joint Opposition to appoint a special presidential commission, which was rejected by the State Minister on the basis that it would not have judicial powers.

“A special presidential commission would only collect facts. It would not be empowered to push for a legal result and that is what must be done. Whatever step is taken, it must mean something. This is why I say our best approach would be to appoint a presidential commission empowered in the right way to be powerful enough to deal with the extremely powerful people who are involved in this situation,” Perera went onto say ,without specifically mentioning names.

The alleged bond scam and the CoPE report came up during several speeches delivered by JVP and Joint Opposition parliamentarians on Monday as the Budget debates continued into a new week. The debates kicked off with Parliament taking up the expenses for several ministries including Defence, Justice, Southern Development and Law and Order ministries.

Weerawansa spent for Mahinda’s election campaign funds allocated for court buildings

November 21, 2016

It was revealed in Parliament today (21st) that more than Rs.150 million allocated to construct buildings for courts in Gampaha and Galle have been spent for Mr. Mahinda Rajapaksa’s election campaigns.

This was revealed when the Minister of Justice Wijedasa Rajapaksa responded to a question posed by JVP Parliamentarian Vijitha Herath while participating in the committee stages of the budget debate. He asked why the construction of eh buildings in the districts have not been completed.

Despite Minister of Justice was careful not to mention any names, Parliamentarian Vasudeva Nanayakkara, who spoke animatedly said complaining against Parliamentarians in such a way was not ethical and people need not know such sensitive information.

The construction of those buildings were under the Ministry of Construction, Engineering Services, Housing and Common Amenities and Wimal Weerawansa was the minister in charge of eh ministry during Mahinda Rajapaksa regime.

The relevant information was revealed when investigations were carried out to find why allocations were not received by the Engineering Corporation said Minister Wijedasa Rajapaksa.

Isis claims responsibility for Kabul mosque suicide bomb blast

Dozens killed and more than 80 injured in attack on mosque in Afghan capital in latest attack targeting Shia community

Afghan security forces keep watch in front of the mosque in Kabul after the bomb attack. Photograph: Omar Sobhani/Reuters

Sune Engel Rasmussen in Kabul-Monday 21 November 2016

Islamic State has claimed responsibility for a suicide attack on a crowded mosque in Kabul that killed more than 30 people and wounded dozens in its third major attack on minority Shias in the Afghan capital since July.

More than 80 people were injured, according to Ismail Kawoosi, a spokesman for Afghanistan’s ministry of public health. The number of dead, which included at least one child, was expected to rise.

The attack, on Monday afternoon, targeted the Baqir ul-Uloom mosque in the Darulaman area. It took place towards the end of a prayer ceremony marking Arbaeen, a religious observance on the 40th day of the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, perceived by Shias to be the rightful heir to the prophet Muhammad.

Jamil Yawari, 22, who was injured in the blast and woke up in hospital after being flung into a wall by the explosion, said the mosque was crowded at the time of the attack. “In my line, I sat next to three or four children,” he said.

Afghan municipality workers sweep Baqir-ul Ulom mosque after the suicide bomb attack. Photograph: Rahmat Gul/AP

Images circulating on social media, purportedly from the scene, showed numerous dusty and bloodied bodies spread across the mosque floor.

A statement in Arabic from Isis’s Amaq news agency said one of its fighters had targeted the mosque.

It is the third time in as many months that Kabul’s Shias have been targeted in a large-scale attack. In October, a gunman attacked another Shia mosque in Kabul where mourners had gathered to mark Ashura, Imam Hussein’s death day.

Affiliates of Isis claimed culpability for that attack, in which at least 14 people died, and for an attack in July, which killed at least 80 protesters who were mainly Hazaras, a Shia minority.

While Afghanistan has traditionally avoided sectarian conflict on a level that plagues other countries in the region, the recent emergence of fighters loyal to Isis, a Sunni group, has coincided with a recent spate of terrorist attacks against Shias.

The Afghan president, Ashraf Ghani, condemned the attack, which he called “a great crime and the work of the enemies of the people of Afghanistan”.

The president “considers attacks on sacred and religious sites to be clear enmity with Islam and the people of Afghanistan as well as an attempt to sow seeds of discord”, a statement said.

Syria war: Rebel group supplied with anti-air missiles

Ansar al-Islam Front says it has 'good number' of man-portable missiles in south Syria, in first apparent relaxation - or breach - of US ban

A member of Ansar al-Islam Front hold an SA-7 anti-aircraft missile (screegrab)

Monday 21 November 2016

A Syrian rebel group has paraded a cache of shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles, the first evidence of the weapons being supplied to opposition forces after an expected relaxing of US restrictions.

Members of the Ansar al-Islam Front were shown in a video posted on 20 November testing SA-7 Strela-2 missiles.

READ: 'Aleppo must not fall': US allies to flood city with anti-aircraft missiles

The group said they had a "good number" of the weapons, which were being deployed among Ansar and Free Syrian Army forces to counter government aircraft in Daraa and Quneitra, to the south of the country.

The first fighter in the video can be heard saying: "We, in Ansar al-Islam Front, have distributed several points of air defence to counter any attempt by the Syrian warplanes or helicopters which bombs points in Quneitra province. We have good number of these missiles."

A second fighter, named as "Abu Bilal" in the video, says: "We, in Ansar al-Islam Front and factions of the FSA, are distributing equipment and soldiers toward Tal al-Hara, Mashara, Sandaniya and Jabata. And in the coming days you will hear good news from Quneitra and its surroundings.

"There are a lot of preparations for ambushes and units deployed on the front lines. There are units of air defence, infantry elements and other several sets of our factions and the factions of the FSA in Quneitra and its surroundings."

US may allow weapons?

The supply of the missiles breaches a standing order from the US to prohibit their distribution in Syria. The US has feared the weapons could fall into the hands of groups such as the Islamic State or the Nusra Front and be used against American forces, their allies and civilian aviation.

However, a high-level rebel source told Middle East Eye in late September that the US was to clear the way for allied nations to begin supplying the weapons, as Russian and Syrian forces increased their attacks on rebel-held areas of the northern city of Aleppo.

"The US confirmed the green light to begin sending them to rebels through supply routes still open through Jordan and Turkey," the source told MEE at the time. "Rebels are being told only to target Syrian helicopters, not Russian - but it's not clear they will abide by this."

The source told Middle East Eye that the US had confirmed it would allow Qatar and Saudi Arabia to begin shipments.

The Reuters news agency at the same time quoted anonymous US officials as saying the assault on Aleppo had "heightened" the possibility of the Obama administration lifting the ban.

However, there is no evidence of the missiles reaching Aleppo, where supply routes have been cut by a siege by Syrian government forces.

The Ansar al-Islam Front is reportedly among dozens of rebel groups that have in the past been supplied with US-made BGM-71 anti-tank missiles, with US approval and through Saudi channels.

The SA-7 was designed by the Soviets in the 1960s and was among the first generation of man-portable air defence weapons, known by the acronym "Manpads", although there have been several upgraded variants since.

Trump in the White House: An Interview With Noam Chomsky

Photo Credit: screengrab via Tavis Smiley

By C.J. Polychroniou, Noam Chomsky / AlterNet-November 20, 2016

The following excerpt is from the forthcoming book Optimism Over Despair on Capitalism, Empire, and Social Change by Noam Chomsky and C.J. Polychroniou from Haymarket Books. This interview is copyright 2016 Noam Chomsky and C.J. Polychroniou.

On Nov. 8, 2016, Donald Trump managed to pull the biggest upset in U.S. politics by tapping successfully into the anger of white voters and appealing to the lowest inclinations of people in a manner that would have probably impressed Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels himself.

Trump in the White House.docx by Thavam Ratna on Scribd

3 questions about the Supreme Court’s future: (Yes, Trump probably could nominate his sister)

Who will Donald Trump nominate as Justice Antonin Scalia's successor? Washington Post reporter Robert Barnes identifies potential Trump nominees for the Supreme Court. (elyse samuels/The Washington Post)

By Robert Barnes November 21 at 11:00 AM

Since Donald Trump won the presidential election, I have been consistently asked three questions about the Supreme Court. Two seem obvious, and the third, at least to me, was surprising.

Can President Obama simply appoint Judge Merrick Garland to the court since the Senate has refused, for 250 days and counting, to act on the nomination?

How likely is it that the court’s jurisprudence on abortion will change now that Trump will be choosing justices?

And can Trump nominate his sister, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, in Philadelphia, to the high court?

The Post's Robert Barnes tackles an idea gaining traction that suggests President Obama can sidestep the Senate to appoint Merrick Garland. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post)

Garland’s fate

The first question is the most controversial. Even those who insist that Obama has the power to force the issue on Garland’s nomination agree it is unlikely that he would try.

The Constitution provides that the president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint . . . Judges of the Supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States.”

The Republican-led Senate, of course, has refused to even hold a hearing on Garland’s nomination, much less consent to his appointment. The Republicans’ position since Justice Antonin Scalia’s death in February has been that the next president should choose Scalia’s replacement.

In the past, it has been generally assumed that the Senate can kill judicial nominations simply by refusing to act upon them until the president leaves office. Two current members of the court — John G. Roberts Jr. and Elena Kagan — had their earlier nominations to lower courts end without the Senate taking votes.

But millions have signed petitions urging another view — that Obama gave the Senate a chance to advise him on Garland’s nomination, and because lawmakers did not vote one way or the other, the president is free to move on to the “shall appoint” part of the Appointments Clause.

Those who are urging such an approach often point to an op-ed in the spring in The Washington Post by lawyer Gregory L. Diskant. “Note that the president has two powers: the power to ‘nominate’ and the separate power to ‘appoint,’ ” Diskant, a former Supreme Court clerk, wrote. He acknowledged that such an approach would draw a lawsuit.

[Opinion: Obama can appoint Garland if Senate does nothing]

For starters, President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, can go back to his day job. (Video: Gillian Brockell/Photo: Bill O'Leary/The Washington Post)

Diskant has found little support among constitutional experts, most of whom have said that “advise and consent” means what it has traditionally been understood to mean. Otherwise, the document would have said the president can make appointments unless the Senate steps in to veto his actions.

And a federal judge last week dismissed a lawsuit that would have forced the Senate to vote.

Liberals also have suggested a recess appointment for Garland. The chance would come in early January, in the time when the current Congress ended and the next one began. Other justices have been appointed in recesses and later confirmed by the Senate.

But eventual confirmation is impossible in the current scenario, and Garland’s term would last only about a year.

The New Republic last week championed the idea in an article headlined “Obama Can and Should Put Merrick Garland on the Supreme Court.” But after proposing the idea, author David Dayen concluded:

“This would be completely out of character for Obama,” and “the gambit would have an extremely low likelihood of permanent success — even if the [Supreme] Court didn’t rule the Garland appointment unconstitutional (and it probably would), he’d be out in a year,” he wrote.

Notably, in separate events last week, liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor said that Trump will be choosing the court’s ninth justice.

Abortion

In a postelection interview on CBS’s “60 Minutes,” Trump repeated his pledge to nominate antiabortion justices who could help overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision that said a woman has a constitutional right to seek an abortion.

[What abortion could look like without Roe]

If that happened, Trump said, abortion decisions would go back to the states, and some could ban it. Asked whether he was comfortable with the idea that women might have to go to other states to end their pregnancies, Trump replied: “Well, we’ll see what happens. It’s got a long way to go.”

Almost everyone can agree on that.

It became clear at the end of the court’s last term that there is a majority on the court to maintain Roe and the line of subsequent cases that have expounded on that constitutional right. The court has acknowledged the state’s interest in protecting fetal life but also said a state’s restrictions cannot put an “undue burden” on a woman’s right.

The court in June found that Texas had violated that right with a law that, among other things, required doctors at abortion clinics to have admitting rights at nearby hospitals and imposed expensive standards on clinics.

[Supreme Court strikes down Texas abortion clinic law]

In a detailed and legalistic opinion, Justice Stephen G. Breyer said Texas’s assertion that the requirements were to protect women’s health could not be proved and were pretext for simply making it more difficult for women to obtain the procedure.

Ginsburg more pithily said in a concurrence that laws that “do little or nothing for health but rather strew impediments to abortion, cannot survive judicial inspection.”

The decision was 5 to 3, which meant that even if Scalia had been voting, the law would be struck down.

But what’s lost to neither side is that three of the five in that majority are Ginsburg, 83, Breyer, 78, and Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, 80. The replacement of only one would shift the balance.

Even so, the court moves incrementally. It is far from clear that even a majority of those who disagree with Roe would move quickly to dismantle it. But the possibility is motivating both sides of the divisive issue.

Judge Maryanne Trump Barry

Trump himself has mused about nominating his sister to the Supreme Court, although he has said it is unlikely.

“I would love to, but I think she would be the one to say, ‘No way, no way,’ ” he said in a Fox News interview last year.

[Trump says his sister wouldn’t be interested in Supreme Court]

Judicial ethics experts said that federal laws would not prohibit Trump from nominating Barry, who was elevated to the appeals court by President Bill Clinton in 1999.

“I doubt the anti-nepotism statute covers it because it’s not a branch of government he controls,” said Richard Painter, a University of Minnesota professor who served as an ethics enforcer in the George W. Bush administration.

And he and Stephen Gillers, a law professor at New York University, also agreed that a Justice Barry would not be constrained from ruling on all issues involving the federal government.

She would probably have to recuse herself “on those cases in which President Trump was seen to have a significant interest,” Gillers said. “That would not be every case involving the U.S. It would not be most such cases.”

But obstacles abound. For one, she is not on the list of 21 people whom Trump has pledged to pick as his nominee. For another, Barry, 79, is the older sister of the oldest man ever elected president. Presidents like their Supreme Court nominees to be a lasting legacy; Barry took senior status five years ago.

Also: See Abortion above. The National Review has called Barry a “pro-abortion extremist judge.”

Barry, who served on the appeals court with Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr., was part of a panel that struck down a New Jersey ban on the later-term abortion procedure critics call “partial-birth abortion.”

Barry called the law a “desperate attempt” to undermine Roe. Besides pointing out that the Supreme Court had struck down a similar state law, she wrote that it was “based on semantic machinations, irrational line-drawing, and an obvious attempt to inflame public opinion instead of logic or medical evidence.” (The Supreme Court later upheld a federal version of the ban.)

So for those who supported Trump because of the importance of the Supreme Court, Barry is probably not what they were looking for.