Which of these is more likely to happen: Obama appointing a Supreme Court justice?

In the coming months, the Supreme Court will be hearing a number of cases concerning the Constitution.

On one side, there’s President Barack Obama’s nominee for the high court, Merrick Garland.

On the other, there are five justices who could be confirmed, including Chief Justice John Roberts.

Here’s what you need to know about which of these Supreme Court nominees you should be keeping an eye on.

Obama’s nominees will be heard by the Senate, and their hearings are scheduled for March.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on Garland’s nomination on March 13.

Obama nominated Garland in December 2013, after he was confirmed by the full Senate and the White House.

The Supreme Court has long been seen as a test case for the Obama administration, because the court has been known to uphold key federal laws, including abortion rights.

Garland was appointed to the bench in 1999 by George W. Bush, who said at the time, “I think the court’s not going to change much on abortion.”

But Obama’s pick is not the first Supreme Court nominee Obama has put forward, either.

In December 2012, President Obama nominated Merrick D. Garland, the current chief justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Texas, to the court.

Garland served on the court from 1995 to 2005, and he has been a staunch opponent of abortion rights, which he believes prevent the U.S. from being “as free and equal as we could be.”

Garland is also the author of the landmark 2010 case United States v.

Windsor, which established the right of same-sex couples to marry.

Garland is currently the president of the University of Texas at Austin Law School.

Obama announced his pick for the court on March 14, 2016, and Garland is expected “to make an important contribution to the Supreme [Court] and to our nation’s legal system.”

The court’s term is set to end on June 7, 2024.

Obama has been criticized by conservatives for having a more liberal majority than the Republican-controlled Senate.

Garland will be expected to uphold a number Supreme Court decisions, including a decision in May 2015 upholding the Affordable Care Act.

Obama is also expected to nominate to the U, S. Supreme Court a justice who will be more sympathetic to the legal rights of women and minorities.

A judge who is nominated by a Democratic president will be appointed by the next president, and a nominee nominated by the Republican president would need to be confirmed by both chambers of Congress.

Obama said he was “confident” that Garland would support the constitutional rights of all Americans.

In November 2014, Garland voted with the liberal justices in the 5-4 ruling that upheld Texas’s abortion law.

Garland joined Justice Anthony Kennedy in the majority opinion, writing that abortion is “the fundamental right of a woman to control her own body, to decide for herself the means by which she will bear the offspring she chooses, and to protect her life.”

Garland also voted with two other justices to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act, which allows gay couples to legally wed.

The Obama administration has defended the law, arguing it was necessary to protect children from being harmed by the “threats of same sex unions.”

Obama has also said that he wants to appoint judges who will “respect the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law.”

In June 2015, Garland wrote in the UMass Law Review that he believed that the law was constitutional, and that he was concerned that some judges might “favor abortion or gay rights” over constitutional rights.

In June 2014, President Trump nominated Garland to the federal appeals court in the nation’s capital.

Garland has a reputation for being a conservative judge who could support the abortion rights of samesex couples.

Garland wrote the opinion that struck down a key provision of the Defense.

He also wrote a decision striking down the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Choice program.

Garland’s opinion, however, could have a major impact on how the Supreme Supreme Court handles abortion issues.

He wrote in June 2014 that he agreed with Justice Anthony M. Kennedy that “there is a real danger that the Court’s interpretation of the abortion statute, and its interpretation of Roe v.

Wade, may undermine the Court and, perhaps, even the Constitution.”

In the case of Hobby Lobby, a corporation that refused to provide health insurance to employees because it believed it violated their religious beliefs, Garland authored the majority decision in a 6-3 ruling that said the company was required to provide employees with a form of birth control in order to prevent pregnancy.

Garland also wrote in Hobby Lobby v.

Sebelius that “the Court should reject the notion that, as an expression of religious liberty, the birth control mandate violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”