|
nothing matters
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 06:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 04:35 |
|
|
Hey guys! At least we don't have to deal with an 8-person SCOTUS for four years! Guys! Guys?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
ComradeCosmobot posted:Hey guys! At least we don't have to deal with an 8-person SCOTUS for four years! Guys! Guys? Hopefully we do.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 06:22
|
|
|
I had to unbookmark this thread a few months ago because of all the triumphant gloating and outrage after Scalia died and Obama appointed what's his name. Any interesting developments since then?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:17
|
|
|
Number Ten Cocks posted:I had to unbookmark this thread a few months ago because of all the triumphant gloating and outrage after Scalia died and Obama appointed what's his name. Any interesting developments since then? Trump gets to appoint Scalia's replacement. And probably Ginsberg's.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:18
|
|
|
Number Ten Cocks posted:I had to unbookmark this thread a few months ago because of all the triumphant gloating and outrage after Scalia died and Obama appointed what's his name. Any interesting developments since then? An honest thank you for reminding me that scalia's still dead so it's not all bad
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:An honest thank you for reminding me that scalia's still dead so it's not all bad Say “howdy” to Associate Justice Rafael Edward Cruz.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:19
|
|
|
Noctone posted:So what happens after Trump gets curbstomped on Tuesday, does Garland get fast-tracked or are they going to conjure up some other bullshit reason to stall? Oh, thanks for this update. Deceptive Thinker posted:If the Senate goes blue as well, yes, they will rush him through Also good to know. Kloaked00 posted:I can't see how this is going to work out well for Republicsns at all. If I were Garland, I'd be pissed at them for jerking me around for months, and being just plain disrespectful to me and the bench. Certainly would make me less inclined to strongly consider conservative philosophies when making rulings Yikes, sounds like the Republicans are in a bad way.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Say “howdy” to Associate Justice Rafael Edward Cruz. Also, regardless, scalia's still dead
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
I can't wait to see Chief Justice Yiannopoulos's jurisprudence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:An honest thank you for reminding me that scalia's still dead so it's not all bad You misunderstand him. He's gloating because a Scalia clone is gonna get appointed. This guy unironically supports republican bathroom bills.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
awesmoe posted:Yeah trump loves cruz so this is really likely Not that it will matter with Republicans having everything and Cheeto Benito in office ruled by Pence. We're going to be getting at least one person worse and likely more unless Ginsberg holds on for some possible improvements in 2020.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:24
|
|
|
Well, I hope Democrats filibuster as hard as Republicans would have, and if the filibuster gets abolished, at least when Democrats are back in control they'll be able to say they weren't the ones who did it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 08:56
|
|
|
More like Democat
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:00
|
|
|
galenanorth posted:they'll be able to say they weren't the ones who did it. This is worth nothing. See: no punishment for GOP obstructionism of SCOTUS appointment.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:11
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:This is worth nothing. The Democrats are to fractious to unite into the wall of obstruction that the GOP has. They also don't have nearly as strong a propaganda media arm as the right wingers do. We can hope that they somehow do manage to organize enough to block of the worst of it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:14
|
|
|
Number Ten Cocks posted:I had to unbookmark this thread a few months ago because of all the triumphant gloating and outrage after Scalia died and Obama appointed what's his name. Any interesting developments since then? We are about embark on an exciting journey into the unknown. Gonna find out just how efficiently congress can work and fill the judicial vacancies with just the most unexpected characters. China's Global Warming gambit has worked, we have lost the mandate of heaven and will now live in interesting times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
Now that I think about it, Obama's stacking of the lower benches hilariously comes to naught now that SCOTUS is going to have fun setting precedent with 5-4 or 6-3 conservative majorities.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
It could go 7–2. SCOTUS will have conservative majority till the 2030s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 09:52
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:SCOTUS will have conservative majority till the 2030s. At an absolute bare minimum, and I think that's an extremely generous estimate because they are going to nominate people who have at least 30 years of life expectancy left.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
I wonder if we'll see a redo of FDR's court packing scheme and the SCOTUS loosening the screw on the New Deal if this shakes out into a massive liberal majority in the other two branches in 2020 as the pendulum swings. The Hoover comparisons are too tempting as well. In any case we've basically entered the Twilight Zone. It feels like the court getting neutered or scrapped is more likely than a liberal SCOTUS majority, in the 20-30 year timescale.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 10:09
|
|
|
I guess the democrats are going to be glad they didn't invoke the nuclear option. Bad news is maybe the republicans will 
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 10:15
|
|
|
MrBond posted:I guess the democrats are going to be glad they didn't invoke the nuclear option. Bad news is maybe the republicans will The Republicans absolutely will, given that it’s even necessary. There is zero downside.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 10:16
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The Republicans absolutely will, given that it’s even necessary. There is zero downside. The amount of people's ignorance regarding the votes needed to confirm once new Congress is in is really sad.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 10:32
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:You can always recess appoint justices, it's just never made sense to do it. Might make sense now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:The Republicans absolutely will, given that it’s even necessary. There is zero downside. Yeah the filibuster for these nominees was dead anyway, even if clinton had won she wasn't going to cross 60 senators so the first time a hypothetical clinton nom got blocked they would have just done away with it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 11:52
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:Not that it will matter with Republicans having everything and Cheeto Benito in office ruled by Pence. We're going to be getting at least one person worse and likely more unless Ginsberg holds on for some possible improvements in 2020. I am really, wholeheartedly hoping she does. Hope is a lie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
Comedy option: republicans gently caress up so bad they lose the senate in two years, democrats actually grow half a spine instead of tepidly refusing to play by the rules of the game and claim that a President should not be able to appoint a justice if the public sentiment has shifted
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 13:09
|
|
|
I'm drawing a blank, does a recess appointment last until the end of the year or the end of the session?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
duz posted:I'm drawing a blank, does a recess appointment last until the end of the year or the end of the session? Until the next session of the senate.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
Obama won't recess. He believes in the spirit of government too much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 14:50
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Obama won't recess. He believes in the spirit of government too much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Obama won't recess. He believes in the spirit of government too much. Oh I know, I just want to have the numbers right while I spin elaborate fantasies in my alcohol ridden mind.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 15:14
|
|
|
how long do you predict before a federal abortion ban passes and it goes to the court to overturn rvw? first year?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
Kobayashi posted:Obama won't recess. He believes in the spirit of government too much. Obama should, just as a statement that this is his nominee, recess appoint Garland and then submit Garland to the new senate. They'll vote him down I'm guessing, but at least he'll get his vote and it'll be official that you need both the White House and the senate to confirm a judge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Obama could absolutely recess Garland on his way out the door, but I think that would just end up getting a worse replacement sworn in. The best hope I have for the nation is that someone gets it in Trump's ear that it'll be good to just go ahead and re-submit Garland for the vacant seat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:The best hope I have for the nation is that someone gets it in Trump's ear that it'll be good to just go ahead and re-submit Garland for the vacant seat. Hahahahahahahahahaha
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 16:37
|
|
|
So, we lose equality in the following human rights: -Marriage -Womens rights -Right to Vote (Voting Rights Act de-fanging) Anything else?
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:So, we lose equality in the following human rights: Probably collective bargaining.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 04:35 |
|
|
Please tell me the liberal justices (and maybe Kennedy) can get secret service protection because I legit fear for their safety if any major rulings somehow go 5-4 against the GOP in the future.galenanorth posted:Well, I hope Democrats filibuster as hard as Republicans would have, and if the filibuster gets abolished, at least when Democrats are back in control they'll be able to say they weren't the ones who did it.  you think the filibuster's going to exist next year. Aren't you precious. Party Plane Jones posted:Might make sense now. Garland wouldn't accept since it's temporary and the Senate would just immediately recess once Trump's in office since that'd kick out Garland from the SCOTUS and DC circuit. Obama probably won't even recess appoint the non-SCOTUS vacancies and if/when he doesn't that'd be an unfortunate yet ironically fitting end to the man of Hope And Change who planned to work with the GOP instead of treat them as the hostile force they are. Mr. Nice! posted:Obama could absolutely recess Garland on his way out the door, but I think that would just end up getting a worse replacement sworn in. The best hope I have for the nation is that someone gets it in Trump's ear that it'll be good to just go ahead and re-submit Garland for the vacant seat. You have a better chance of seeing Trump appoint one of his own lawyers or some rear end in a top hat like Guilani, Christie, or Roy Moore.
|
|
#
?
Nov 9, 2016 17:02
|
|
