Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia dead at age 79

186 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
josh

Nominee to be announced in less than two hours.

josh

Legal ‏@ReutersLegal

Breaking: President Obama likely to announce appeals court judge Srinivasan as #SCOTUS nominee - source. 

josh

So much for that last post. Merrick Garland is the choice.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/la-na-supreme-court-nominee-20160...

quizzical

link doesn't work

josh
quizzical

portal error so nope. thank for trying though

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture
NorthReport

So Obama has now put the cat amongst the pigeons
Almost no one thinks Garland will be confirmed

What is the process if Obama wants to change his nominee? And how long does he have to wait to change nominee?

josh

NorthReport wrote:
So Obama has now put the cat amongst the pigeons
Almost no one thinks Garland will be confirmed

What is the process if Obama wants to change his nominee? And how long does he have to wait to change nominee?


Garland would have to withdraw for him to change nominees. Or else be rejected by the senate,

NorthReport

What was enjoyable today is that Obama timed his announcment beautifully and took Trump off the the front pages.

 

http://www.salon.com/2016/03/16/merrick_garland_the_holy_sht_nominee_why...

 

NorthReport

McConnell says the Senate is just following the Biden rule  Laughing

 

But have the cracks already begun in the GOP opposition as some Senators now say they will meet with the nominee?

 

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
josh
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
abnormal

[img]12523961_1353874587963249_87688128202621[/img]

NorthReport
NorthReport

Come on Barack, withdraw Garland! Wink

NorthReport

Screw Flake!

Come on Barack, withdraw Garland! Cut a deal with Hillary. Withdraw Garland in exchange for Hillary appointing you to the Supreme Court down the line. Wink

Flake says it might be Garland time

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/jeff-flake-merrick-garland-vote-su...

NorthReport

Voters hopefully will show zero mercy to these hardcore obstructionists  Frown

Cruz: GOP may block Supreme Court nominees indefinitely

In a vintage return to his confrontational style, Sen. Ted Cruz indicated that Republicans could seek to block a Democratic president from filling the vacant Supreme Court seat indefinitely. 

After staking his endorsement of Donald Trump on a list of potential conservative Supreme Court nominees, Cruz said on Wednesday that there is precedent to limiting the Supreme Court to just eight justices. Last week, Cruz's colleague, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), suggested the GOP should confirm President Barack Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, to avoid having to swallow a more liberal nominee under Hillary Clinton.

As is his nature, Cruz took a harder line when asked how Republicans would handle a potential Clinton nominee while campaigning in Colorado for Darryl Glenn, a longshot candidate for the Senate. 

 You don't have a chance

 

Trump to 2020 prospects: You don't have a chance

By NOLAN D. MCCASKILL

“There will be plenty of time for debate on that issue ... There is certainly long historical precedent for a Supreme Court with fewer justices. I would note, just recently, that Justice [Stephen] Breyer observed that the vacancy is not impacting the ability of the court to do its job. That’s a debate that we are going to have," Cruz said, in remarks first reported by the Washington Post.

Cruz was unlikely to vote for any Democratic nominee given his conservative ideology, but his remarks could indicate a broader shift within the GOP to halt Democrats from shifting the court's balance to the left. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said earlier this month the GOP would be "united" in blocking a Clinton appointment, remarks he later softened. 

An indefinite GOP blockade of a Supreme Court nominee would almost certainly lead to an erosion in the Senate's super-majority requirement. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid has already suggested lowering the bar for Supreme Court nominee from 60 votes to a simple majority. Under Reid, Democrats changed the Senate rules to allow all nominees but Supreme Court appointments to be approved by a majority vote.

162610-mitch-mcconnell-getty-1160

 

GOP closing spending gap with Dems in battle for Senate

By SEUNG MIN KIM and BURGESS EVERETT

"We need to treat it like the constitutional crisis it will be if Democrats don't take back the Senate majority," Reid said on Wednesday night in an email to members of the liberal Progressive Change Campaign Committee. "The Supreme Court could dwindle to 7, then maybe 6, Justices. It would turn our Justice system and our democracy on its head. The Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves."

Republicans have blocked Garland from even having hearings for more than seven months, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said the Senate will not confirm Garland in post-election lame duck. In his last availablity on Capitol Hill before the election, McConnell refused to entertain the possibility that the Senate may be forced to entertain a more liberal judge next year, though there may be enough centrist Republicans and those deferential to presidential prerogative to confirm a justice like Garland.


http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/cruz-supreme-court-blockade-230363

NorthReport

Republicans at war over Supreme Court

Senate Republicans are girding for a brutal conflict over how to handle the lingering Supreme Court vacancy.

 

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/republicans-split-supreme-court-va...

 

1,488

NorthReport

A lot at stake here.

CLINTON, OBAMA, GARLAND, AND THE G.O.P.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/clinton-obama-garland-and-the-g-o-p

josh

And it was all lost. The Republicans' strategy worked. Evil triumphed.

NorthReport
bekayne

Whenever I see this thread bumped I keep thinking he's come back to life.

ygtbk

bekayne wrote:

Whenever I see this thread bumped I keep thinking he's come back to life.

Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead?

sherpa-finn

ygtbk wrote:

bekayne wrote:

Whenever I see this thread bumped I keep thinking he's come back to life.

Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead?

For any Babblers under 50 ..... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axByUFSa7N8

 

NorthReport

So who is the nominee going to be?

NorthReport
josh

NorthReport wrote:
So who is the nominee going to be?

Probably Hardiman or Gorsuch. The former would appear to be less extreme.

pookie

josh wrote:
NorthReport wrote:
So who is the nominee going to be?
Probably Hardiman or Gorsuch. The former would appear to be less extreme.

It's Gorsuch.  Who has been called "Republican royalty".

SCOTUS continues its time-honoured tradition of seating only Harvard/Yale law grads.

josh

Well, at least Gorsuch appears from all reports to be a collegiant, respectful judge.  Not an arrogant, nasty piece of work the way Scalia was.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Charlie Pierce has put up his take on Gorsuch. He begins with this:

Charlie Pierce wrote:
WASHINGTON—Just after sunset, if you took a little jaunt down Pennsylvania Avenue from the Capitol to the White House, you would have seen it all dolled up like a Hollywood premiere. The only thing that was missing was a red carpet ("Tell us, Senator Graham. Who are you wearing?") and Entertainment Tonight, although the latter is probably on Melania Trump's No Way in Hell list in perpetuity. He gave them a show and the television news divisions, network and cable, demonstrated that they learned nothing from getting played for two years by President* Trump and his extended carny act.

And what emerged from the ballyhoo was prospective Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, who is 49-years-old and who, if he's confirmed, and assuming the actuarial tables hold, will be bivouac'ing on the bench for three decades. It is a dark moment in your life when you realize that a Supreme Court nominee will be causing damage long after you're dead.

Pierce is 63 years old.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

josh wrote:

Well, at least Gorsuch appears from all reports to be a collegiant, respectful judge.  Not an arrogant, nasty piece of work the way Scalia was.

Paraphrasing someone I knew who went to CEGEP at Marianopolis "It doesn't hurt any less to get queer bashed by people who have table manners."

Sean in Ottawa

bagkitty wrote:

josh wrote:

Well, at least Gorsuch appears from all reports to be a collegiant, respectful judge.  Not an arrogant, nasty piece of work the way Scalia was.

Paraphrasing someone I knew who went to CEGEP at Marianopolis "It doesn't hurt any less to get queer bashed by people who have table manners."

I hope to remember that quote. They are powerful words.

sherpa-finn

josh wrote:

Well, at least Gorsuch appears from all reports to be a collegiant, respectful judge.  Not an arrogant, nasty piece of work the way Scalia was.

Well, according to the British paper the Daily Mail (a conservative rag, but generally credible) "Supreme Court Justice nominee Neil Gorsuch founded and led a student group called the ‘Fascism Forever Club’ at his elite high school."  

For the moment, I am going to put this into the "credible but yet to be confirmed' category of news.

And anyhow, Jesuit schoolboys will be Jesuit schoolboys. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4182852/Trump-s-SCOTUS-pick-foun...

sherpa-finn

DP.

Pages