|
evilweasel posted:http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2016/02/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-reported-dead.html/ It also (mostly) quashes the specter of Evenwel v. Abbott completely and utterly loving Dems from winning another election for eternity, so that's something. The lower courts already sided against Evenwel, so if if the court splits 4-4 on it come June it'll defer to the lower court ruling.
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 21:31 |
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:So, uh, I guess we have a constitutional crisis now? Nah, SCOTUS has been down members before, and split decisions just result in deferring to the lower court. Yes, there's almost zero chance Obama is able to push a candidate through the Senate, but come 2017 we'll hopefully have President Hillary and a Dem controlled Senate. They only need a simple majority to confirm, so even if it's only by one seat, it'll do.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Hollismason posted:Reminder :  Do it Obama.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:41
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:It's a good day.  It always feels tasteless to celebrate any person's death anywhere, but Scalia was such a shithead who worked so hard to stop the wheels of progress from turning in this country that I can't help but be glad to see him go.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
straight up brolic posted:yeah but it's hard to imagine them not taking a 10 day recess over the next year. The main argument was also that the vacancies didn't happen during the recess itself, but rather Obama sat on them until the Senate adjourned, then filled holes behind their backs while they were away. In this case Scalia dropped dead during a long recess, so if he wants to make an emergency appointment, he absolutely can. Jeb Bush 2012 posted:This is the crisis fyi. Unless you think that setting a precedent of "supreme justices never get nominated unless the president and senate are from the same party" is no big deal. That's only the case for the current polarized political climate, though. When (if?) the parties move back towards the center and start begrudgingly cooperating again, it won't be an issue.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:11 months of bullheaded obstructionism by the GOP in an election year Well the thing is, everyone is gambling now. If the senate obstructs any and all Obama nominations, then they're gambling hard that they'll have control of the presidency/Senate come 2017 to push through a conservative justice. Otherwise it's in their best interest to use the leverage they have now to bargain for a compromise seat. Likewise, Obama's gambling that the dems will win big in the election, because if he thinks they'll lose he should be playing ball with the senate. If he thinks they'll win, he can just keep giving the Senate liberal hippie candidates forever knowing their clock is running out. So really the only way anything is happening is if both parties think they're going to lose.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:The Democrats better make a huge deal of the GOP being obstructionist assholes for 9 months. Awww, that's cute.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Shimrra Jamaane posted:Usually you'd be right but It's an election year with both the Presidency and the Senate at stake. They need to at least pretend to care. I mean, maybe it'll galvanize some Dems who otherwise wouldn't care to come out and vote, but the Dems can scream to high heavens about obstruction and it won't sway one lousy republican. If the Dems call out Mitch on being an obstructionist piece of poo poo, all he has to do is come out and go "Yeah, we're obstructing because Obama has given us nothing but liberal commie judges who hate God/Are Freedumbs/The Constitution and we're bravely holding out for a 'proper' justice. Don't forget to vote for Trump if you want a sane SCOTUS nomination!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
C. Everett Koop posted:Now if it looks like Cruz might get the nomination/win, could McConnell start the voting process to spite Cruz, or would he fall in line? If there's one thing Republicans are great at, it's cutting off the nose to spite the face, so who knows. Shimrra Jamaane posted:Of course it won't change the minds of Republicans. But the Dems can use it to energize their own base. Campaign Hilary can go full out Campaign Obama. If the Dems, Obama, and Hillary/Bernie all absolutely hammer it over and over this election cycle, then maybe it'll be helpful. I'm skeptical they'll do it though, it's not something the Dems have historically been good at.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:21
|
|
|
That implies Roberts is willing to stick his dick into politics in the first place to tell Congress to be politically neutral though. Not to mention he's a falling star among the Reps who's lost his status as True ConservativeTM thanks to refusing to vote for overturning Obamacare.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
spoon0042 posted:Obama just spoke, didn't say much other than that he intends to make a nomination. "I'm going to try and do my job, whether the Republicans like it or not" is a pretty good stance to take. I'm more curious if he'll make an emergency appointment before the Senate is back on the 22nd. My gut tells me no - since it's probably better to not let the Republicans play the Executive overreach card as an excuse for doing nothing - but on the other hand we're in full on Trollbama mode, so who knows.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
Three Olives posted:With full knowledge of how hopelessly naive this sounds I find it really hard to believe that Republicans will think it is politically advantageous to stall out an entire branch of government just because they don't like they president for 11 months when they haven't even nominated someone to replace him yet. You obviously haven't been paying attention to the current Congress. They can and will completely stonewall a Constitutional process for a full year - all the while playing themselves up as true patriots who are trying to uphold the American way - just to spite Obama.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Radish posted:I can't fully trust someone that considers Scalia a friend There are a multitude of dimensions to a person beyond their politics. Much like how Justice Thomas is apparently an incredibly gregarious individual off the bench, despite being a silent bizzaro alien from the 1770's with terrible opinions on it. Also I have to imagine that after decades of working with the man you would have to stop seeing it as personal hatred and instead spin it as professional rivalry, if only to keep one's sanity.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 21:31 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:That's okay there are quotes from McConnel in 2005 during the Democratic filibuster about how nominations are the president's prerogative alone and the Senate's role of advise and consent exists to ensure the nominee is qualified and not obstruct for political reasons. Still easy to spin, just have to say that unlike W, Obummer is exerting executive tyranny with the overreach of his power and it's the Senate's prerogative to be the bulwark against it in all things, even SCOTUS noms. The right will eat that poo poo up like candy.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 02:53
|
|