Dems in Senate passed a resolution in1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments

[Faun]

Read it and weep, Democrats. The shoe is on the other foot. David Bernstein at the Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog:

Thanks to a VC commenter, I discovered that in August 1960, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution, S.RES. 334, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.” Each of President Eisenhower’s SCOTUS appointments had initially been a recess appointment who was later confirmed by the Senate, and the Democrats were apparently concerned that Ike would try to fill any last-minute vacancy that might arise with a recess appointment.

The GOP opposed this, of course. Hypocrisy goes two ways. But the majority won.

As it should this time.

Hat tip: Instapundit


Read more: Blog: Dems in Senate passed a resolution in1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

And Obama is not looking to make a recess appointment for the Supreme Court. You're a moronic on this thread as you were on the other thread you tried passing this nonsense on.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Their job is to advise and consent. That's in the Constitution. There are Republicans saying they will not do that for Obama.

Living vicariously through Trump since your own life is a miserable failure, Vagisil? You're still pushing nonsense about recess appointments which have nothing to do with current events since Obama is not seeking to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.

 

[Vigilante]

Read it and weep, Democrats. The shoe is on the other foot. David Bernstein at the Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog:

Thanks to a VC commenter, I discovered that in August 1960, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution, S.RES. 334, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.” Each of President Eisenhower’s SCOTUS appointments had initially been a recess appointment who was later confirmed by the Senate, and the Democrats were apparently concerned that Ike would try to fill any last-minute vacancy that might arise with a recess appointment.

The GOP opposed this, of course. Hypocrisy goes two ways. But the majority won.

As it should this time.

Hat tip: Instapundit


Read more: Blog: Dems in Senate passed a resolution in1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

And Obama is not looking to make a recess appointment for the Supreme Court. You're a moronic on this thread as you were on the other thread you tried passing this nonsense on.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Their job is to advise and consent. That's in the Constitution. There are Republicans saying they will not do that for Obama.

Living vicariously through Trump since your own life is a miserable failure, Vagisil? You're still pushing nonsense about recess appointments which have nothing to do with current events since Obama is not seeking to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

 

[Lumpy 1]

In November 2013, Senate Democrats used the nuclear option to eliminate filibusters on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments other than those to the Supreme Court.

And what are we talking about now?

The Supreme Court.

You still following? That means the nuclear option was never invoked for this topic.

Do I need to dumb it down further for you?

It won't matter, of course. You know you're lying, but you're going to do it anyways. The dishonesty is kind of what defines you.

You may appreciate this link...

1,063 Documented Examples of Barack Obama’s Lying, Lawbreaking, Corruption, Cronyism, Hypocrisy, Waste, Etc. - Freedom Outpost

So cries Dan, from Squirrel Hill.

Yup, you're screwed and laughing, good times..

Sure, uh-huh.

Dan from Squirrel Hill tell you that too?

I trust Dan from Squirrel Hill far more than Faun from Obama's butt cheeks ..

 

[Faun]

And Obama is not looking to make a recess appointment for the Supreme Court. You're a moronic on this thread as you were on the other thread you tried passing this nonsense on.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Their job is to advise and consent. That's in the Constitution. There are Republicans saying they will not do that for Obama.

Living vicariously through Trump since your own life is a miserable failure, Vagisil? You're still pushing nonsense about recess appointments which have nothing to do with current events since Obama is not seeking to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Posted and answered, dumbfuck. I need not repeat the answer because you're incapable of comprehending English.

 

[Faun]

And what are we talking about now?

The Supreme Court.

You still following? That means the nuclear option was never invoked for this topic.

Do I need to dumb it down further for you?

It won't matter, of course. You know you're lying, but you're going to do it anyways. The dishonesty is kind of what defines you.

You may appreciate this link...

1,063 Documented Examples of Barack Obama’s Lying, Lawbreaking, Corruption, Cronyism, Hypocrisy, Waste, Etc. - Freedom Outpost

So cries Dan, from Squirrel Hill.

Yup, you're screwed and laughing, good times..

Sure, uh-huh.

Dan from Squirrel Hill tell you that too?

I trust Dan from Squirrel Hill far more than Faun from Obama's butt cheeks ..

Then by all means, keep sucking Dan from Squirrel Hill...

 

[Vigilante]

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Their job is to advise and consent. That's in the Constitution. There are Republicans saying they will not do that for Obama.

Living vicariously through Trump since your own life is a miserable failure, Vagisil? You're still pushing nonsense about recess appointments which have nothing to do with current events since Obama is not seeking to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Posted and answered, dumbfuck. I need not repeat the answer because you're incapable of comprehending English.

 

[Faun]

Their job is to advise and consent. That's in the Constitution. There are Republicans saying they will not do that for Obama.

Living vicariously through Trump since your own life is a miserable failure, Vagisil? You're still pushing nonsense about recess appointments which have nothing to do with current events since Obama is not seeking to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms. But here's a question for Senator Schumer: Can you show me the clause that says the Senate must vote on, let alone confirm, a President's nominee? I'll save him the effort: There is no such clause in the Constitution

Posted and answered, dumbfuck. I need not repeat the answer because you're incapable of comprehending English.

 

[Lumpy 1]

You may appreciate this link...

1,063 Documented Examples of Barack Obama’s Lying, Lawbreaking, Corruption, Cronyism, Hypocrisy, Waste, Etc. - Freedom Outpost

So cries Dan, from Squirrel Hill.

Yup, you're screwed and laughing, good times..

Sure, uh-huh.

Dan from Squirrel Hill tell you that too?

I trust Dan from Squirrel Hill far more than Faun from Obama's butt cheeks ..

Then by all means, keep sucking Dan from Squirrel Hill...

Sucking ? mmm interesting .. I suppose for an Obama fan, sucking his butt hole is your form of trust..

 

[Faun]

So cries Dan, from Squirrel Hill.

Yup, you're screwed and laughing, good times..

Sure, uh-huh.

Dan from Squirrel Hill tell you that too?

I trust Dan from Squirrel Hill far more than Faun from Obama's butt cheeks ..

Then by all means, keep sucking Dan from Squirrel Hill...

Sucking ? mmm interesting .. I suppose for an Obama fan, sucking his butt hole is your form of trust..

Nothing speaks like the voice of experience, eh, lumpy?

 

[Lumpy 1]

Yup, you're screwed and laughing, good times..

Sure, uh-huh.

Dan from Squirrel Hill tell you that too?

I trust Dan from Squirrel Hill far more than Faun from Obama's butt cheeks ..

Then by all means, keep sucking Dan from Squirrel Hill...

Sucking ? mmm interesting .. I suppose for an Obama fan, sucking his butt hole is your form of trust..

Nothing speaks like the voice of experience, eh, lumpy?

If you say so..you do have at least 8 years of experience...

 

[Vigilante]

Congress Can Deny Barack Obama the Power to Replace Justice Scalia
[URL='http://www.cato.org/blog/constitution-allows-congress-deny-barack-obama-power-replace-justice-scalia']Cato Institute ^ | Feb. 14, 2016 | Michael F. Cannon
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) responded to the sudden death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia with a press release saying, "this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President." Republican presidential candidates Ben Carson, Sen. Ted Cruz (TX), and Sen. Marco Rubio (FL) agree. Hillary Clinton spoke for many Democrats: "The Republicans in the Senate and on the campaign trail who are calling for Justice Scalia’s seat to remain vacant dishonor the Constitution. The Senate has a constitutional responsibly here that it cannot abdicate for partisan political reasons." Conor Friedersdorf says the no-vote stratagem is...[/URL]

 

[NYcarbineer]

Read it and weep, Democrats. The shoe is on the other foot. David Bernstein at the Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog:

Thanks to a VC commenter, I discovered that in August 1960, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution, S.RES. 334, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.” Each of President Eisenhower’s SCOTUS appointments had initially been a recess appointment who was later confirmed by the Senate, and the Democrats were apparently concerned that Ike would try to fill any last-minute vacancy that might arise with a recess appointment.

The GOP opposed this, of course. Hypocrisy goes two ways. But the majority won.

As it should this time.

Hat tip: Instapundit


Read more: Blog: Dems in Senate passed a resolution in1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Why didn't you start this thread with the Republican opposition to this?

Hypocrite.

 

[Faun]

Sure, uh-huh.

Dan from Squirrel Hill tell you that too?

I trust Dan from Squirrel Hill far more than Faun from Obama's butt cheeks ..

Then by all means, keep sucking Dan from Squirrel Hill...

Sucking ? mmm interesting .. I suppose for an Obama fan, sucking his butt hole is your form of trust..

Nothing speaks like the voice of experience, eh, lumpy?

If you say so..you do have at least 8 years of experience...

Actually, it was you who said so, not me.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

New justice will be appointed sometime next spring.

 

[williepete]

Weekly Standard ^ | February 14, 2016 | Adam J. White
Senator Schumer appeared Sunday on ABC's This Week and responded to suggestions that the Senate might not confirm the lame-duck President's nomination to replace the late Justice Scalia: "show me the clause [in the Constitution] that says [the] president's only president for three years." True, Presidents serve four-year terms.

Schumer seems to be very adaptable on his position.


Chuck Schumer in 2007: Senate Should Block Supreme Court Nominees for 18 Months

Schumer’s audience was the American Constitution Society (ACS), a left-wing legal organization. The society was founded in an effort to limit the impact that the Federalist Society was having on promoting conservative legal principles in American law schools, which are notoriously liberal.

On July 27, 2007, Schumer told his ACS audience:

"How do we apply the lessons we learned from Roberts and Alito to be the next nominee, especially if—God forbid—there is another vacancy under this president? … [F]or the rest of this president’s term and if there is another Republican elected with the same selection criteria let me say this: We should reverse the presumption of confirmation. The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito. Given the track record of this president and the experience of obfuscation at the hearings—with respect to the Supreme Court, at least—I will recommend to my colleagues that we should not confirm a Supreme Court nominee except in extraordinary circumstances."

Chuck Schumer in 2007: Senate Should Block Supreme Court Nominees for 18 Months - Breitbart



------------

 

[hazlnut]

Read it and weep, Democrats. The shoe is on the other foot. David Bernstein at the Washington Post’s Volokh Conspiracy blog:

Thanks to a VC commenter, I discovered that in August 1960, the Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution, S.RES. 334, “Expressing the sense of the Senate that the president should not make recess appointments to the Supreme Court, except to prevent or end a breakdown in the administration of the Court’s business.” Each of President Eisenhower’s SCOTUS appointments had initially been a recess appointment who was later confirmed by the Senate, and the Democrats were apparently concerned that Ike would try to fill any last-minute vacancy that might arise with a recess appointment.

The GOP opposed this, of course. Hypocrisy goes two ways. But the majority won.

As it should this time.

Hat tip: Instapundit


Read more: Blog: Dems in Senate passed a resolution in1960 against election year Supreme Court appointments
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

The Dems were the conservative party in 1960.

Dope.