:(
No doubt it would be completely unacceptable to replace her so close to the election. /sarcasm
Printable View
:(
No doubt it would be completely unacceptable to replace her so close to the election. /sarcasm
Aaaaah shit.
There goes the neighbourhood.
This is the wrong angle. American conservatives aren't principled. If McConnell replaces Ginsburg, the pressure on the next Dem president and senate to expand the court will be irresistible. The best thing Trump can do is to not nominate anyone until after the election.
2020 just went from brutal to Ruthless.
At least Lindsey Graham wants you to use his words against him.
https://youtu.be/QGerk0XRvLc
By that point Congress will have adjourned, Rand. He'd have to call the Senate into special session due to extraordinary circumstances, that will get challenged in the courts and I expect the courts will delay until it's no longer justiciable, i.e. January.
I wouldn't put it past Trump or McConnell trying.
Do the Courts really have the power to challenge a special Lame Duck session of the Senate?
To overrule it directly, against the wishes of the Executive and the house in question? They definitely don't have the power to do so, regardless of whether they'd technically have the authority or not. To delay things? Always, absolutely. And since it's not something they'd want to get involved it, I expect them to just delay, particularly since if SCOTUS does issue a formal ruling it would be with only eight justices which raises the possibility of a 4/4 decision.
Nope, he's gonna pretend he didn't say that.
Twitter Link
(the tweet shows him to be a liar in two ways)
People are really stupid about this. What Mitch did was about optics and not holding a hearing. The reality is that the other party is NEVER obligated to approve the president's nominee to the Supreme Court. Garland was never getting confirmed by a Republican senate. The rhetoric was all smoke and mirrors to justify not having public hearings that could sway public perception.
I know they were talking bullshit back then to save face, just as they are now talking bullshit to rush to take advantage of the death of RBG. "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president" vs "We were put in this position of power and importance to make decisions for the people who so proudly elected us", both statements are tosh. "We are motivated only by power, principles or ideology or even respect for the recently deceased are dropped the moment they get in the way of the ultimate goal" would be the honest statement.
https://youtu.be/49pDoICdrqw?t=320
Foxnews, so you feel at home. See how this dick blatantly avoids answering any questions about this?
I mean, there's nothing stopping him but that doesn't mean he'll actually do it.
Given the stunt that the GOP played last time, if they play silly buggers now then I think its quite probable he'll do something to restore balance if they have the Senate majority.
The GOP would have no grounds to complain. They will complain, but they'll have no grounds to do so. Oh and the GOP removed the filibuster from SCOTUS appointments so it will just take a simple majority in the Senate to do it.
The GOP may be better leaving RBG's position unfilled and letting the new President fill it, removing any excuse to act like that. That way even if RBG is replaced by a liberal they still have a 5-4 majority anyway.
Several Republican politicians explicitly stated that it was, at least to them, about the principle—the principle a president should not be allowed to nominate anyone to SCOTUS towards the end of his term, until the people have expressed their approval or disapproval in a new election. Their present reversal of opinion on that matter shows them to be unprincipled, spineless liars—not rhetoricians. If you're trying to say that cowardice and lying are conservative virtues, okay, fine—but don't expect to be regarded as anything better than a contemptible shithead. People are only as good as their word; a person whose word means nothing, is, in several important respects, worth nothing.
If they push a replacement through before the election, or in the lame duck period, the political pressure on the next Dem-controlled Senate to expand the court will be nigh irresistible; failure to nullify and punish that move will have negative consequences for several of the 12 Dem senators up for re-election in 2022. Though ordinary people don't tend to care much about SCOTUS, they do care about being screwed or humiliated—and then let down by their political representatives. Dem senators would be leaving themselves open to savage attacks from challengers on their left.
I don't really understand where you guys are getting the idea that it's such a sure thing that Biden is going to do this if he wins the election. I mean, he might do it but it would be a fairly major change in from how the Dems normally do things, and Biden is an extremely conventional D candidate.
How many nakedly corrupt, Bullshit Republican Things have there been this term which have had no more consequences than Lindsey Graham getting owned on Twitter? Six, seven hundred? Why is this the one that's going to push the Dems over the edge?
Frankly, though, it's a lot more likely they'll rush things in before the election. And that's not really stoppable. If any of the vulnerable Republican senators bolt, it'll practically be guaranteeing their loss, no matter how ridiculous a nomination Trump makes.