Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: SCOTUS vacancy

  1. #1

    Default SCOTUS vacancy

    It looks increasingly likely the GOP event/party to present Amy Coney Barrett as nominee may have been a Covid19 "superspreader" event. As well as Trump, Melania and Hope Hicks having Covid19 so too now do at least 2 US Senators who are on camera mingling and socialising and hugging people without masks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  2. #2
    Three confirmed now, with Ron Johnson testing positive and in isolation. I feel like they'll find a way to get it done nevertheless.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  3. #3
    With two rebels confirmed in theory at least that is the majority gone now. 48 aye Vs 49 nay.

    Bet they suddenly find a virtue in permitting remote voting now.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  4. #4
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  5. #5
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  6. #6
    I mean that's where most scientists believe life begins at... but this is a very weird attack angle. The idea that a justice nominated has to agree with everything a president says or does is just bizarre.

  7. #7
    If too many Republicans have the virus to hold a vote this week (though it wouldn't surprise me if they break quarantine to vote) is there a deadline to hold the vote by before the election.

    In the UK Parliament breaks up a month before the election then doesn't exist anymore until it is reconstituted with the newly elected members after it. I know the latter doesn't happen in the States and you continue with a lame duck Congress but does Congress break up at all? Could they be voting the day before the election? The day of it?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    ℬeing upset is understandable, but be upset at yourself for poor planning, not at the world by acting like a spoiled bitch during an interview.

  8. #8
    They can do whatever Mitch McConnell wants to do. If for some reason he can't get it jammed through before election day you can be sure he'll do it in the lame duck session.
    We're stuck in a bloody snowglobe.

  9. #9
    Right, it's on.

    What's up for debate is: is it a good idea to place a Trump sock puppet as a judge who will shoot down ACA, taking away healthcare protection for millions of Americans during a pandemic, just because Trump hates Obama.
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  10. #10
    They really can't count on that. The moment she's confirmed, the pressure to expand and rebalance the court will pass that critical threshold beyond which Dems can't negotiate it away.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  11. #11
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
    Right, it's on.

    What's up for debate is: is it a good idea to place a Trump sock puppet as a judge who will shoot down ACA, taking away healthcare protection for millions of Americans during a pandemic, just because Trump hates Obama.
    The impact of a decision should never be considered by a judge, only what the law is.

  13. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    They really can't count on that. The moment she's confirmed, the pressure to expand and rebalance the court will pass that critical threshold beyond which Dems can't negotiate it away.
    Oh I know, they're dealing with sleazeballs.
    I could have had class. I could have been a contender.
    I could have been somebody. Instead of a bum
    Which is what I am

    I aim at the stars
    But sometimes I hit London

  14. #14
    Dang, I thought this thread would be a debate about the role of SCOTUS justices in how they interpret law, and precedent, citing the Constitution.

    Lewk, the "pro-life" movement can't advance their cause by giving embryos "equal rights" that subjugate women's rights. Legal abortion is already a federally protected law. Just like the ACA. That's precedent, and it's already been adjudicated by the courts.....you just don't like the outcomes. So stop pretending that you don't want to replace judges (or stack courts) in order to get a different opinion/outcome.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •