Reply to Merrick Garland - O's pick for scotus

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Merrick Garland - O's pick for scotus"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote]OK, here's a hypothetical for you and everyone else: Let's say (1) Trump gets elected president, (2) the Democrats take back the Senate, and (3) Ginsburg dies on his first day in office. Would the Democrats in the Senate be acting appropriately and fulfilling their duty if they say, "Nope, we consider Trump an ideologue and a charlatan, so we're not going to consider any Supreme Court nominee he offers. We'll just wait until the next President arrives in 2020 to replace Ginsburg." Justifiable in your worldview?

FWIW, you could easily flip that hypothetical too: Would a Republican Senate in 2017 be justified in refusing to consider any Hillary Clinton nominations for her entire four-year term?

I know the current line Republicans are drawing is just the third year of a President's term, but there's not reason it cannot be extended: Second half of a President's term? Entire President's term? What's the difference? [/quote]

I had a Republican judge tell me in January 1997, pretty much the first week of Clinton's second term, that he thought the Senate could and should just refuse to confirm judges for four years.  I had another Republican judge on the same court tell me, "You know what advise and consent means?  It means we get to pick half of them."

They just make this shit up as they go along.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics