Supreme court nominees

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kmcicco2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kmcicco2000

Guest
Can anyone tell me why it was okay for Mitch McConnell to block a Supreme court nominee by Barack Obama for 10 months because it was too close to an election and then now push through a nominee two months before an election?
 
Christian Charity prevents me from posting what I think about Mitch McConnell. 😃

Jim
 
Kmcicco2000 said:
Can anyone tell me why it was okay for Mitch McConnell to block a Supreme court nominee by Barack Obama for 10 months because it was too close to an election and then now push through a nominee two months before an election?
Click to expand...
He invoked the “Biden Rule”.
And The Republicans are invoking the “Reid Rule.”
Don’t blame Republicans for using the norms established by Democrats.
 
Republicans cited a 1992 speech by then-senator Joe Biden, arguing that if a Supreme Court seat became vacant during the summer, President Bush should wait until after the election to appoint a replacement, or else appoint a moderate acceptable to the then-Democratic Senate.

//////

President Obama named his nominee to the Supreme Court in February of 2016, Merrick Garland.

It was nine months before the election in November.

McConnell kept the SOTUS seat vacant for almost an entire year.

We could only imagine what would’ve happened had Hillary won and named her nominee to the court.

Jim
 
When did Dems prevent a sitting Republican president from nominating a Supreme Court justice?
 
JimR-OCDS said:
Republicans cited a 1992 speech by then-senator Joe Biden, arguing that if a Supreme Court seat became vacant during the summer, President Bush should wait until after the election to appoint a replacement, or else appoint a moderate acceptable to the then-Democratic Senate.

//////

President Obama named his nominee to the Supreme Court in February of 2016, Merrick Garland.

It was nine months before the election in November.

McConnell kept the SOTUS seat vacant for almost an entire year.

We could only imagine what would’ve happened had Hillary won and named her nominee to the court.

Jim
Click to expand...
Yep. The Biden Rule. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
 
Not the same though

Biden called for waiting on June 25, three months later than when Obama nominated Garlland

Also, Congress would be going into their summer recess and not returning until late August when the election season was in full swing.

Such was not the case when Obama nominated Garland

Also, when Biden called for the delay, there was no vacant seat on the SCOTUS.

When Obama made his choice in February, Scalia’s seat was suddenly vacant.

Jim
 
Last edited:
Scalia died in February. It was hardly summer. The Biden rule applies more now then it did then . 2 months to the election and we are cramming this guy though without even vetting him. Lifetime appointment and he will be ruling on more than abortion
 
Kmcicco2000 said:
When did Dems prevent a sitting Republican president from nominating a Supreme Court justice?
Click to expand...
Nobody has been prevented from nominating a candidate. Obama nominated Garland. The Senate exercised the power to advise and concent.
OTOH, Democrats stopped the most brilliant legal mind of a generation from being on the Court: Bork. They tried a “high tech linching “ on Thomas, and now this.
Frankly, I’m not shedding any tears over the treatment of Garland. He was never character assassinated like Thomas was, and now Kavanaugh.
Ginsburg got 96 votes. Kagan 63. Sotomayor 68
How many did Gorsuch get?
 
Actually McConnell never allowed a hearing so the Senate did not advise. Bloked from the beginning. McConnell said at the tme that one of his happiest moments was telling Obama he would not hold hearings on his nominee
 
Kmcicco2000 said:
Actually McConnell never allowed a hearing so the Senate did not advise. Bloked from the beginning. McConnell said at the tme that one of his happiest moments was telling Obama he would not hold hearings on his nominee
Click to expand...
Of course it did. It chose not to give consent until after the election. They had no reason to believe Trump would win.
 
It was McConnell who blocked the hearings. If you have a link to where the whole Senate acted on it I would like to see it
 
Work for your party to control the Senate if one doesn’t like it. That’s the way our Republic works. The Senate’s duty is to “advise and consent” as stated.

Nice, to try and have a Supreme Court that might actually be guided by the Constitution instead of legislating from the bench. Hooray.

McConnell surely, fulfilled his constitutional duties, so if that is so, no harm, no foul.
 
Last edited:
If we followed the Constitution we would probably have a Supreme Court justice named Merrick Garland
 
He has been vetted over six different times.He has an impeccable record.
 
No. There were no hearings. The Senate was not involved. Give me a link to a Senate hearing about Merrick Garland . You can’t because there were none
 
Random trivia:

There were originally six justices on the Supreme Court: one Chief Justice and five associates.

In 1807, Congress increased the number of justices to seven.

In 1837, the number increased to nine.

In 1863, it rose to 10.

In 1866, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which shrank the number of justices back down to seven and prevented President Andrew Johnson from appointing anyone new to the court.

FDR planned on increasing the court to 15 so he could pack it the way he liked, and neutralize the justices who were Anti-New-Deal and kept striking down bits and pieces of it as overreach.
 
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

It’s true 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top