Discussion for article #226272
Does a SCJ appointment have to be approved by the SenateSonsOfMitches?
Do people finally understand what it cost Democrats when thy didn’t sustain a filibuster of now Justice Thomas? Do they understand what it cost when they let Alito and his Chief Justice cohort side through unchallenged in the administration of President Iraq? Do they think that Republicans will leave any weapon unused to block Obama’s next nominees? Do they think that impeachment is off the table if it is seen as a way to block him? Do they think that conservatives like Scalia won’t retire under any circumstances if it means that Obama might be the President to nominate his replacement? He’ll die in office before he lets that happen.
This is why I will hold my nose and vote for Hillary, god forgive me.
NOBamAzserOtwoTERMS wANts TO PAck THe COurt With Left-Wing islaMOfascIST ExtremistS like ClarenCe ThOMas and STephEN Breyer!!!11!1!!!one!!!11!!!
SCOTUS appointments needs to be confirmed the Senate. We can count on the usual obstructionists, e.g. Session R-AL, and maybe a few new wingers.
What the fuck? Do you really think that is appropriate?
I know I speak for all oppressed majorities everywhere when I say I’m just thankful that Clarence Thomas is there to defend the rights of the embattled white man. Yours truly, Mo Brooks
I have a theory that if control of SCOTUS changes hands to the liberals one or two of the remaining conservatives will step down within a year or two. Why would they do so? Because if there’s one thing you can count on from consevratives it’s throwing a temper tantrum and taking their toys and going home. They don’t know how to handle not being in control. If Dems hold the Senate this year I expect you’ll see a wave of Republican retirements in 2016 for much the same reason.
I’m so confused, I must be happy!
The Republicans didn’t block Kagan, and they didn’t block Sotomayor.
Lower court nominees, sure, but filibustering a Supreme Court nominee for nothing but ideological reasons has been a bridge too far even for the Republicans in the Obama era.
If you rearrange the letters in “Elena Kagan,” they spell “Hail Lenin.”
You Won’t Believe What This Supreme Court Did Next!
I think you are probably right with regards to Thomas. Especially if Scalia happens to already be gone. Lets face it, the man is a waste of space on the bench anyway. He won’t have the stomach to keep on fighting if he sees there is no chance of being in the majority for rest of his life.
The other way around, not so much. As someone indicated above, Scalia probably has it written in a living will not to pull the plug if a Democrat is in the White House. Scalia would stay on the bench if he was the only conservative left, I have no doubt.
As for Kennedy, that one has always been hard for me to read.
Alito and Roberts are both going to be there for a long time, though baring some catastrophic personal health problem emerging.
The problem for me is, as much as I respect her, I desperately wish Ginsberg would retire and let Obama lock that position in for a long time now.
Yes. And the Justices selection process is fully able to be filibustered to the Senate’s content.
That could change in an instant if say, Thomas drops dead from a heart attack. Losing one of their assured conservative votes and the majority to an Obama/Clinton replacement? All the stops will come out. I wouldn’t put it past some to try and filibuster any and all nominations for 8 years.
The same argument was made in 2000 as it became apparent the election would come down to a handful of states where the electorate was evenly balanced. The Ralph Nader candidacy had no chance at all of winning; all it could do was insure Republican victory. The supreme court issue was argued to Nader to the point the pleaders were blue in the face to no avail. St. Ralph dismissed their concerns with the airy comment that there was no difference between Al Gore and George W. Bush. Without even recounting the war America was lied into, try to wrap your head around the argument that there’s no difference between Sam Alito and say, Elizabeth Warren. To this day, Nader supporters argue with a straight face that, somehow, it was the democrat’s fault. I will go to my grave believing Ralph Nader is a fraud and his supporters fools.
I do not agree with this article in regard to abortion. Remember Roe itself only became law after Nixon appointed 3 justices giving the GOP a majority on the court which it has held ever since. That is the freedom from government interference when making a personnel decision like procreation is a traditional conservative value.
Therefore, I think that like the most pro-abortion president ever elected, Ronald Reagan, the first governor in American history to sign a bill legalizing abortion and the most liberal bill ever on the subject who appointed Kennedy and other Supreme court justices to assure Roe would remain the law of the land, the GOP merely uses abortion to get middle class voters to vote against their own best interests but fearing the backlash if Roe is actually overturned will do everything they can to keep Roe the law of the land.
What needs to happen is for an abortion case directly challenging Roe needs to reach the Supreme Court.
Three Justices are on record, Scalia, Thomas and Alito, as supporting overturning Roe. Five current justices are on record, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan as supporting Roe.
We really don’t know where Roberts stands on Roe. If Roberts supports overturning Roe, than the entire 2016 election will be about abortion as at least two of the 5 supporting Roe will retire. If Roberts, as I suspect, will when it matters vote to keep Roe the law of the land, than abortion was in fact never a real issue but is continued to be used as Reagan did to get middle class voters to vote against their own best interests without any intent by the GOP to actually do anything for those voters.
Remember, in 1991 there were 8 GOP appointed justices and the lone Dem appointed justice, Byron White was for overturning Roe. It seemed certain Roe would be overturned. But according to the original author of Roe, Justice Blackman, in the 11th hour Justice Kennedy under pressure from REPUBLICANS fearing a backlash for political reasons switched sides and Roe remained the law of the land. There is no doubt in my mind Roberts would do the same.
Hence a challenge to Roe reaching the court NOW would force Roberts and the GOP to admit that they are lying to their own base about overturning Roe of force the GOP to face the backlash it has always feared.
Obama ought to increase the number of justices on the court to 11! Then he could appoint 2 liberal thinking judges and watch the right whine itself into oblivion!
I am afraid we have Vice Pres. Biden to thank for Thomas…he put a stop to the hearings …and there was at least one other women waiting to testify that would have validated Anita Hill’s testimony as he did the same to her…
I think we are in a sad sad state when we know the political leanings of SC judges and for too long those judges follow through on them.