Junebug
Well-known member
The constitution says nothing about the timing of this. The constitution says only that the president nominates and the senate confirms.
So depressing. Reading him was such a joy. IMO, his dissents were the best in the history of the SCOTUS.
The constitution says nothing about the timing of this. The constitution says only that the president nominates and the senate confirms.
The people I'm seeing freak out the most might be the pro-gun folks. They seem convinced they're just a justice away from having their guns seized. They are going to be VERY motivated come the next election.
Also this has huge implications for cases this term (and next if Republicans really aren't going to fill a vacancy until next February). Cases that would have been 5-4 traditional lineup conservative wins will now be affirmed by an equally divided court, and with the vast majority of the circuits controlled by liberal justices thanks to seven years of Obama appointments, that probably favors liberal decisions.
I have no problem with the board or ordinary citizens offering what if scenarios. I disliked Scalia immensely, but if you are a politician, now is the time to let his family mourn. There is plenty of time for politics. I'm seriously going to consider voting for whoever does not mention this weekend whether or not Obama should be able to appoint.
Oliver Wendell Holmes says :fu:
Then you will abstain from this election.
This is a pretty absurd argument. So you think it would be constitutionally permissible for the Senate to never confirm anyone until three more of them die and then they wouldn't have enough for a quorum leaving the Supreme Court completely powerless? That certainly wasn't the original intent of the Framers - I would think as a Scalia aficionado you wouldn't be in favor of that
It's a clear structural implication of the Constitution that the Senate has to confirm people to the Supreme Court, just like the President has to appoint them. Otherwise it would allow either branch to unilaterally abolish the Supreme Court
I'm afraid you are right. I'm holding out hope for Bernie and Kasich.
I don't think the constitution says the senate has to vote on (much less confirm) a sitting president's nominee within any particular time. If you have read some language in the constituion or in its ratification debates on this point I might have missed, feel free to share it.
It may or may not be politically wise for the republicans in the senate to delay, but the constitution most certainly does not require them to act with haste in this circumstance.
The constitution says nothing about the timing of this. The constitution says only that the president nominates and the senate confirms.