Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > The Constitution & The Judicial Branch
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

The Constitution & The Judicial Branch Discuss The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But at the Political Forums; Originally Posted by 300 H and H The Senate hasn't let a lame duck President of either party select the ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2016, 10:25 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,967
Thanks: 1,428
Thanked 2,127 Times in 1,676 Posts
Default Re: The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But

Quote:
Originally Posted by 300 H and H View Post
The Senate hasn't let a lame duck President of either party select the candidate for SCOTUS in over 80 years... Either party.

I see NO reason to do it now. Besides, Obama has had 2 selections already, and judging by those we don't want another Latino or woman more on the court.

We'll get by until the ne+t President is seated, no matter who or what party is elected. We've been down this path before, several times.

Regards, Kirk
From the sidelines, as a Libertarian, what I find interesting is that Republicans have repeatedly stated, "Obama isn't doing his job" and now they apparently don't believe that "Obama or Congress should do their job" as established by the US Constitution.

The Constitution is very explicit when it comes to filling vacancies on the Supreme Court but Republicans apparently don't believe they have any obligation when it come to either the President or the Congress in filling a vacancy.

Instead Republicans choose to take a political gamble that will cost them significantly because of the potential 4-4 split on Supreme Court decisions on already scheduled issues.

For Republicans to win they would have to win both the Presidency and retain control in the Senate and that's highly unlikely to happen. Because of the Electoral College held by Democrats the odds of the Republican candidate winning is less than 50% and with 24 of the 34 Senate seats up for election held by Republicans the odds of them retaining their four-seat advantage is very slim.

In all of this the fact is that the Constitution imposes an obligation upon both the President to fill the vacant seat left by Scalia's untimely death. Why do Republicans believe it's acceptable for them to ignore this Constitutionally imposed requirement on both the President and the Senate?

Since when should partisian politics ever take precedent over the US Constitution? "God" help America if Republicans have their way (which means were screwed because "God" has never helped America).
__________________
BREAKING NEWS
Mexico agrees to pay for the impeachment.
~ Vicente Fox
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2016, 11:14 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Western Iowa
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,666
Thanks: 7,708
Thanked 4,098 Times in 2,669 Posts
Default Re: The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But

If it were the other way around the Democrats would be doing the very same thing...

IF the Senate chooses not to confirm anyone till after the election, they have my support.

Any one who thinks other wise can be left crying in their spilled milk... pun intended.

Regards, Kirk
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2016, 11:25 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 15,149
Thanks: 7,989
Thanked 8,669 Times in 5,378 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
From the sidelines, as a Libertarian, what I find interesting is that Republicans have repeatedly stated, "Obama isn't doing his job" and now they apparently don't believe that "Obama or Congress should do their job" as established by the US Constitution.

The Constitution is very explicit when it comes to filling vacancies on the Supreme Court but Republicans apparently don't believe they have any obligation when it come to either the President or the Congress in filling a vacancy.

Instead Republicans choose to take a political gamble that will cost them significantly because of the potential 4-4 split on Supreme Court decisions on already scheduled issues.

For Republicans to win they would have to win both the Presidency and retain control in the Senate and that's highly unlikely to happen. Because of the Electoral College held by Democrats the odds of the Republican candidate winning is less than 50% and with 24 of the 34 Senate seats up for election held by Republicans the odds of them retaining their four-seat advantage is very slim.

In all of this the fact is that the Constitution imposes an obligation upon both the President to fill the vacant seat left by Scalia's untimely death. Why do Republicans believe it's acceptable for them to ignore this Constitutionally imposed requirement on both the President and the Senate?

Since when should partisian politics ever take precedent over the US Constitution? "God" help America if Republicans have their way (which means were screwed because "God" has never helped America).
There is no Constitutional mandate to fill SCOTUS vacancies. Senate Republicans are well within their Constitutional authority to delay confirmation until after the election. Neither is there a specification of the number of SCOTUS justices. It is not surprising that Obama has turned the SCOTUS into a political circus, it is typical whenever he doesn't get what he wants.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2016, 11:46 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,171
Thanks: 7,687
Thanked 6,483 Times in 3,935 Posts
Default Re: The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
From the sidelines, as a Libertarian, what I find interesting is that Republicans have repeatedly stated, "Obama isn't doing his job" and now they apparently don't believe that "Obama or Congress should do their job" as established by the US Constitution.

The Constitution is very explicit when it comes to filling vacancies on the Supreme Court but Republicans apparently don't believe they have any obligation when it come to either the President or the Congress in filling a vacancy.

Instead Republicans choose to take a political gamble that will cost them significantly because of the potential 4-4 split on Supreme Court decisions on already scheduled issues.

For Republicans to win they would have to win both the Presidency and retain control in the Senate and that's highly unlikely to happen. Because of the Electoral College held by Democrats the odds of the Republican candidate winning is less than 50% and with 24 of the 34 Senate seats up for election held by Republicans the odds of them retaining their four-seat advantage is very slim.

In all of this the fact is that the Constitution imposes an obligation upon both the President to fill the vacant seat left by Scalia's untimely death. Why do Republicans believe it's acceptable for them to ignore this Constitutionally imposed requirement on both the President and the Senate?

Since when should partisian politics ever take precedent over the US Constitution? "God" help America if Republicans have their way (which means were screwed because "God" has never helped America).
The Constitution is explicit that the President shall nominate a person to fill the vacancy. The Constitution also states that Congress has approval or rejection rights. Nowhere in the Constitution is any time limit on either imposed. SCOTUS can do just fine with something other than 9 judges, and has several times in the nation's history.

But again, the liberals use whatever suits the needs of the day. The current President has failed to meet the deadlines on submitting a budget several times. I've not seen any demand from the left to do so.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2016, 11:57 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,967
Thanks: 1,428
Thanked 2,127 Times in 1,676 Posts
Default Re: The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But

Quote:
Originally Posted by 300 H and H View Post
IF the Senate chooses not to confirm anyone till after the election, they have my support.

Regards, Kirk
in short you don't believe the President or the Senate should fulfill their Constitutional obligation to fill a vacany in the US Supreme Court.

Don't ever claim to support the US Constitution if that is your position.
__________________
BREAKING NEWS
Mexico agrees to pay for the impeachment.
~ Vicente Fox
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2016, 12:43 PM
mlurp's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flatlands
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,644
Thanks: 18,304
Thanked 10,537 Times in 8,217 Posts
Default Re: The GOPís Supreme Court strategy is dicey. But

Quote:
Originally Posted by AZRWinger View Post
The 14 lame duck confirmations have been when the Senate and the President have been of the same party. As Obama filled with self importance, crowed after he shut down the Federal government, if Republicans want their way they first have to win elections. Well they did exactly that, taking a Senate majority in the 2014 midterms. Of course what Obama meant was "I won" so bow down before me.

There is nothing in the Constitution specifying the number of SCOTUS justices or setting a.schedule for Senate confirmation. FDR wanted to pack the court with justices sympathetic to his fascist new deal. The court doesnít stop when there is a vacancy on the bench. So all the howling about how the Senate has to move on Obama's nominee is just partisan bickering by Democrats.
well for sure as any other time the President picks from a qualified member of his party. That is part of this Political Game, right. I was addressing the fact that was said not one President in 80 years as a lame duck etc.

As for this second situation in bold reguardless, it is the President right to pick now as it is the Republican's right to hold it up till/IF tey win the W.H. come Nov/January 20th, 2017.

The 3rd in bold has to be the Dem's in this situation {reality takes hold} as why would any "R" bother to complain at this moment?
__________________



_ ... _ Improvise-Adapt-Over Come ... _ ...
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
but, court, dicey, gopís, strategy, supreme, the

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:17 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0