CDZ Trump- Judges and the Senate

[Syriusly]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Nuclear option, pass them through.

 

[Crepitus]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

You can bet your butt they will.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

You can bet your butt they will.

Sorry but waiting 2 years is wrong.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

According to the logic of the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, since the people will have put a DEM Senate in control of confirmation, then that is an indication they want not processing of Supreme Court Justices pending the results of the next Presidential election.

Remember the Senate is not Constitutionally required to take any action on a nomination, as was pointed out when the Senate failed to do it's job with the Garland nomination.



>>>>

 

[Crepitus]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

You can bet your butt they will.

Sorry but waiting 2 years is wrong.

So was waiting for 1+. Tough shit dude. Trump's attempt to pack the judiciary ends in november

 

[WorldWatcher]

Sorry but waiting 2 years is wrong.

Sorry but leaving a Supreme Court Justice seat vacant for over a year because the President was a different party then the Senate majority was also wrong when in fact the nominee was someone that had been spoken of very highly be GOP lawmakers in the past.

McConnell issued a statement within hours of Scalia's death there would be no action on a nominee and he did it, more accurately he didn't do his job.


>>>>

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The issue wasn’t just that the President was of a different party, but that a Democratic president would be replacing a conservative justice with that of a liberal.

Had Scalia not died and instead Ginsberg retired while Obama was in office, the Republican Senate might have been more inclined to confirm Obama’s nominee.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Should Kennedy retire, however, that would be another matter altogether for the Democratic Senate majority.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

Neither. They hold a vote and vote "no."

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Dems will fall a seat or two short this fall in the Senate, I think.

If they do take control, there will be no new SCOTUS judges, unless the GOP president compromises big time.

 

[Syriusly]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

You can bet your butt they will.

Sorry but waiting 2 years is wrong.

Sure waiting 2 years is wrong- just like waiting 1 year was wrong.

The precedent was set- 1 year, 2 year- hell we might end up with when the Senate is controlled by the party opposite the President that they refuse to approve any Supreme Court nominee for 4 years.

And yes- that is all wrong- but the precedent was set.

Should the Democrats be noble- and allow the nomination and approval of extreme right wing Justices on principle- i.e. that the Democrats won't stoop to the level of the Republicans?

Or should they block the extreme right wing justices- and act just like the corrupt Republicans?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The precedent is set, and it won't change now.

 

[Syriusly]

The issue wasn’t just that the President was of a different party, but that a Democratic president would be replacing a conservative justice with that of a liberal.

Had Scalia not died and instead Ginsberg retired while Obama was in office, the Republican Senate might have been more inclined to confirm Obama’s nominee.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Should Kennedy retire, however, that would be another matter altogether for the Democratic Senate majority.

Doesn't really change anything though. The idea that a Supreme Court seat is supposed to stay 'liberal' or 'conservative' is antithetical to our Democratic government.

Personally, I think in today's polarized government, and given the precedent established by the Republicans, if the Democrats controlled the Senate I don't see any Trump nominated justice getting even a hearing.

I am not sure that is right or best for our institutions- though I would be glad to see any Trump nominee blocked.

 

[2aguy]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

there is no way the democrats will approve any of Trump's nominees...ever. They will refuse. This is why the republicans need to vote against all democrats in all elections.....any vote for a democrat is a vote to end the 2nd Amendment....also the other 9......

the democrats made the choice first with the lower courts....there is no Constitutional point about confirming or not confirming justices.....

 

[2aguy]

The issue wasn’t just that the President was of a different party, but that a Democratic president would be replacing a conservative justice with that of a liberal.

Had Scalia not died and instead Ginsberg retired while Obama was in office, the Republican Senate might have been more inclined to confirm Obama’s nominee.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Should Kennedy retire, however, that would be another matter altogether for the Democratic Senate majority.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Wrong...the mask is off....if the democrats take control of the Senate they will never confirm a justice appointed by Trump....or any other judge....it will not happen...

 

[Syriusly]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

there is no way the democrats will approve any of Trump's nominees...ever. They will refuse. This is why the republicans need to vote against all democrats in all elections.....any vote for a democrat is a vote to end the 2nd Amendment....also the other 9......

the democrats made the choice first with the lower courts....there is no Constitutional point about confirming or not confirming justices.....

Well there is certainly the very real possibility of Democrat acting just as badly as the Republicans have when they regain the Senate.

 

[2aguy]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

there is no way the democrats will approve any of Trump's nominees...ever. They will refuse. This is why the republicans need to vote against all democrats in all elections.....any vote for a democrat is a vote to end the 2nd Amendment....also the other 9......

the democrats made the choice first with the lower courts....there is no Constitutional point about confirming or not confirming justices.....

Well there is certainly the very real possibility of Democrat acting just as badly as the Republicans have when they regain the Senate.

The democrats started it.....they refused to seat Bushes judges......

 

[Syriusly]

The issue wasn’t just that the President was of a different party, but that a Democratic president would be replacing a conservative justice with that of a liberal.

Had Scalia not died and instead Ginsberg retired while Obama was in office, the Republican Senate might have been more inclined to confirm Obama’s nominee.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Should Kennedy retire, however, that would be another matter altogether for the Democratic Senate majority.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Wrong...the mask is off....if the democrats take control of the Senate they will never confirm a justice appointed by Trump....or any other judge....it will not happen...

Like I said from the beginning- it is very possible that the Democrats will rely upon the precedent set by Republicans and do exactly that.

I just don't know that Democrats acting as corruptly as Republicans is the right thing to do.

 

[Syriusly]

Lets try a thought experiment- lets pretend this scenario happens in the Fall- a couple of Senate seats switch from R to D- and Democrats control the Senate.

Does the Democratic controlled Senate approve Trump nominated Supreme Court Justices?
Or do they decide to wait until the next Presidential election so that the next President can nominate the justices?

What about Federal judges?

I am of mixed mind myself. I of course thought it was irresponsible for the Senate to refuse to consider Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court- but the precedent was set- and certainly Democrats could use it to their own advantage.

On the other hand- is conducting government that way the best for the United States? Because the other side made a corrupt choice- does that mean Democrats should do the same?

there is no way the democrats will approve any of Trump's nominees...ever. They will refuse. This is why the republicans need to vote against all democrats in all elections.....any vote for a democrat is a vote to end the 2nd Amendment....also the other 9......

the democrats made the choice first with the lower courts....there is no Constitutional point about confirming or not confirming justices.....

Well there is certainly the very real possibility of Democrat acting just as badly as the Republicans have when they regain the Senate.

The democrats started it.....they refused to seat Bushes judges......

LOL- the Democrats 'started it'

The Republicans started it when they refused to even start the confirmation process of a Supreme Court justice- saying that the American people would prefer that the Senate wait a year for the next election.

But should Democrats act as corruptly as Republicans?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The issue wasn’t just that the President was of a different party, but that a Democratic president would be replacing a conservative justice with that of a liberal.

Had Scalia not died and instead Ginsberg retired while Obama was in office, the Republican Senate might have been more inclined to confirm Obama’s nominee.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Should Kennedy retire, however, that would be another matter altogether for the Democratic Senate majority.

The same is true for Trump: should Thomas decide to retire when Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic majority would likely confirm Trump’s nominee.

Wrong...the mask is off....if the democrats take control of the Senate they will never confirm a justice appointed by Trump....or any other judge....it will not happen...

You are wrong, of course.