Not dead a day and The Obamanation intends to nominate successor for Scalia on Supreme Court: CNN

[Steve_McGarrett]

 

[Camp]

There are at least eight to ten Republican Senators who face tough reelections in blue states. That is enough to swing the Senate back to Democratic control. More importantly, if those Republicans support blocking a Presidential nomination to the Supreme Court they face strong odds of not getting reelected. Hence, lots of openings for Republicans to distance themselves from Republican obfuscation.

Wont happen.

You don't know that. You are just guessing, like everyone else. Some of them are already in tough and tight races. This issue could easily have a negative impact. The election is a long way off.

 

[ogibillm]

1956 - Eisenhower selects Brennan, a recess appointment
not seeing any other election year opportunities

 

[Vigilante]

A little known fact.... To remain in effect, a recess appointment must be approved by the Senate by the end of the next session of Congress...Since it is likely that the Obomanation will try to put another Socialist subversive, anti-American on the SCOTUS, the easy answer is that the Congress stays in session until AFTER Jan. 20th and the inauguration! Most forget that the Senate majority leader can do this...IF that BITCH MITCH has a set of balls!

 

[konradv]

Republicans are the obstructionists. Everyone knows that and holding up Obama's nomination will only serve to reinforce that perception going into the election.

You can whimper and play that card if it makes you feel any better, it's so very typical of the left when confronted with the contrary.

What are you talking about? You're the one bitching about Bork all the time. He was wrong. Get used to it. The reality of the matter is that the public has the Republicans' number when it comes to obstruction and threatening to shut things down and go home when they don't get their way. They need to man up for a change and do the job they're sent to Washington to do.

 

[Vigilante]

Republicans are the obstructionists. Everyone knows that and holding up Obama's nomination will only serve to reinforce that perception going into the election.

You can whimper and play that card if it makes you feel any better, it's so very typical of the left when confronted with the contrary.

What are you talking about? You're the one bitching about Bork all the time. He was wrong. Get used to it. The reality of the matter is that the public has the Republicans' number when it comes to obstruction and threatening to shut things down and go home when they don't get their way. They need to man up for a change and do the job they're sent to Washington to do.

 

[the_human_being]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

 

[jillian]

reading the responses here only confirms my suspicions that the vast majority here do not have a clue how our government is supposed to work.
can anyone tell me why the justices are not able to be fired by the president?
(actually there is a way for them to be removed but its pretty hard)
What is the purpose of the supreme court? is it to work with the other branches? is it to agree with the other branches or is it to protect the integrity of the constitution by ruling on cases that may or may not violate that same constitution.
If it is the last, then how can anyone agree that appointing a justice based on his/her personal view on various things, or by their affiliation to party can be a good thing. It cant. It wouldn't be good if the right did it, and its no good when the left does it either.

the integrity of the constitution is protected by the senate doing it's job and appointing the president's nominee so long as he or she is qualified. not because you are terrified that a judge will be put on the bench who isn't a theocrat.

"integrity of the constitution" and you support Obama ...LOL..What the hell did you learn in the leftist indoctrinating law School?

She went to law school the same place as OnePercenter went to business school. In their minds.

I've looked into the law school she said she went to. A bunch of radical, leftist, nutjobs . So she could have went there

Near as I can recall, I have never said what law school i went to RWNJ.

loon.

 

[ogibillm]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

 

[the_human_being]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

I understand. Payback is hell. Suck it up and get used to it. You've a long time to go.

 

[ogibillm]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

I understand. Payback is hell. Suck it up and get used to it. You've a long time to go.

the more i think about it the more i think the senate allows a recess appointment. they aren't obstructionists and they don't allow obama another appointee long term

 

[SwimExpert]

Not my fault when discussing presidents appointing to the Supreme Court your dimwit thought I was talking about a Justice.

As opposed to a mascot?!?

 

[SwimExpert]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

I understand. Payback is hell. Suck it up and get used to it. You've a long time to go.

Call me crazy, but I tend to think the GOP should strive to a higher standard than the Democrats.

 

[the_human_being]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

I understand. Payback is hell. Suck it up and get used to it. You've a long time to go.

Call me crazy, but I tend to think the GOP should strive to a higher standard than the Democrats.

Ok. You're crazy. Happy now?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

I understand. Payback is hell. Suck it up and get used to it. You've a long time to go.

Call me crazy, but I tend to think the GOP should strive to a higher standard than the Democrats.

there is no striving required, its just a natural fact that the GOP have a higher standard.
first clue? conservatives tend to be the ones that go to work and pay the taxes that support the democrats.

 

[Borillar]

]
Nothing has been shown to indicate a "tradition" or that any process has been used other than the one in the Constitution. The key component has always been the date of time the Justice passes away or resigns. There have never been any "Traditions" that were needed or were suggested except the one you are making. which of course is pretty much meaningless partisan talking point fodder.

Sure it has, no president that could serve another term has nominated a Justice in the last year of office in the last eighty years. Eighty years is a tradition. Not a soul has rebutted my reason for doing it either.

you've been misinformed.


Amy Howe Editor/Reporter

Posted Sat, February 13th, 2016 11:55 pm

Email Amy
Bio & Post Archive »
Supreme Court vacancies in presidential election years
In the wake of the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, questions have arisen about whether there is a standard practice of not nominating and confirming Supreme Court Justices during a presidential election year. The historical record does not reveal any instances since at least 1900 of the president failing to nominate and/or the Senate failing to confirm a nominee in a presidential election year because of the impending election. In that period, there were several nominations and confirmations of Justices during presidential election years.

The first nomination during an election year in the twentieth century came on March 13, 1912, when President William Taft (a Republican) nominated Mahlon Pitney to succeed John Marshall Harlan, who died on October 14, 1911. The Republican-controlled Senate confirmed Pitney on March 18, 1912, by a vote of fifty to twenty-six.

President Woodrow Wilson (a Democrat) made two nominations during 1916. On January 28, 1916, Wilson nominated Louis Brandeis to replace Joseph Lamar Rucker, who died on January 2, 1916; the Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed Brandeis on June 1, 1916, by a vote of forty-seven to twenty-two. Charles Evans Hughes resigned from the Court on June 10, 1916 to run (unsuccessfully) for president as a Republican. On July 14, 1916, Wilson nominated John Clarke to replace him; Clark was confirmed unanimously ten days later.

On February 15, 1932, President Herbert Hoover (a Republican) nominated Benjamin Cardozo to succeed Oliver Wendell Holmes, who retired on January 12, 1932. A Republican-controlled Senate confirmed Cardozo by a unanimous voice vote on February 24, 1932.

On January 4, 1940, President Franklin Roosevelt (a Democrat) nominated Frank Murphy to replace Pierce Butler, who died on November 16, 1939; Murphy was confirmed by a heavily Democratic Senate on January 16, 1940, by a voice vote.

On November 30, 1987, President Ronald Reagan (a Republican) nominated Justice Anthony Kennedy to fill the vacancy created by the retirement of Louis Powell. A Democratic-controlled Senate confirmed Kennedy (who followed Robert Bork and Douglas Ginsburg as nominees for that slot) on February 3, 1988, by a vote of ninety-seven to zero.

In two instances in the twentieth century, presidents were not able to nominate and confirm a successor during an election year. But neither reflects a practice of leaving a seat open on the Supreme Court until after the election.

Supreme Court vacancies in presidential election years

There is no custom or practice of leaving seats open on the USSC. Republicans shouldn't worry overmuch though. If the country is insane enough to elect another repug to the presidency, there are other elderly justices that will likely need replacing over the next few years. Ginsburg is over 80 and Kennedy and Breyer are pushing 80. Probably ought to have mandatory retirement ages set so you don't have a sitting justice with dementia or Altzheimers deciding cases.

 

[easyt65]

LATEST BREAKING NEWS:

Scalia found dead with pillow over his head.
- I just hate when you die by 'NATURAL CAUSES', like when a pillow 'naturally' falls on your head and smothers you to death in your sleep.

He had denied / refused a security team to be assigned to him earlier that day...

'Heart attack ruled out.'

....but 'they' have decided NO AUTOPSY IS NECESSARY...

I'm crazy, huh?

 

[Borillar]

FLASHBACK: In 2007, Schumer Called For Blocking All Bush Supreme Court Nominations

and the right bitched to high heaven, threatening the nuclear option, or as they liked to call it the "constitutional option"
they called it that because, as they claimed at the time, it was the constitutional duty of the senate to give an up or down vote for every nomination

I understand. Payback is hell. Suck it up and get used to it. You've a long time to go.

Call me crazy, but I tend to think the GOP should strive to a higher standard than the Democrats.

They already strive for a higher standard for Democrats than they do for their own.

 

[Dr Grump]

There are at least eight to ten Republican Senators who face tough reelections in blue states. That is enough to swing the Senate back to Democratic control. More importantly, if those Republicans support blocking a Presidential nomination to the Supreme Court they face strong odds of not getting reelected. Hence, lots of openings for Republicans to distance themselves from Republican obfuscation.

Wont happen.

Another shit prediciton...

 

[easyt65]

Rancher says Scalia found dead with a pillow over his head, his bad clothes without a wrinkle, which occur when you climb into bed ALIVE and sleep for any amount of time.

He also teports the cause of death was reported as Natural Causes, specifically a heart attack...but no qualified medical person was there to examine Scalia and make that call.

Later, a qualified medical person did make a statement - 'It wasn't a heart attack.'

I'm betting it had something to do with how sleeping with a pillow pressed tightly accross one's face unexpectedly for a long period of time is not conducive to one's physical well-being and longevity rate.