P
ProVobis
Guest
It’s been a mostly Republican appointed SCOTUS since 1973, the year of Roe vs Wade.
Women's March planned for October to protest Trump filling Ginsburg's Supreme Court seat
- Status
N
No3
Guest
I took a college class on women freedoms in 1972. It was a history of liberalism.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
We’ve come full circle Agreat pro life Republican POTUS a pro life majority in the SCOTUS,.Let women pay for their own abortions since it is such a private decision. I do t want any part of it,via taxpayer funded
P
ProVobis
Guest
Makes sense, they passed the ERA in 1971. Ratified by the 38th state in 2020.
H
Horton
Guest
This is the first time I’ve heard a liberal blame Trump for something in advance of his presidency, like it was a conspiracy to have all of this happen, you know to have RBG die just before the election so Trump can place another non liberal Justice on the SC.
I know right? They claim to fight for women, to march for women, to speak for women butttttttt… only for the women who think like them and let them tell women how to live.
No thank you!
It wasn’t a matter of the amount of time keeping the seat open. This whole thing is so simple but the left has a need to make it convoluted and messy because they just can’t accept Trump is able to do what he is going to do and the Senate is able to do what they plan to do.
The constitution gives a sitting president the authority to nominate a person to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. Period. There are no exceptions, no qualifiers, no because Obama didn’t get his nominee voted on, none. The president has the authority to do this.
The Constitution gives the US Senate the authority to vote or not vote on the nominee the president put forward. That is their job. Again there are no exceptions, no qualifiers, no keeping a “precendent” a “standard” or “honoring” RBG’s wishes.
See my response above. ^^^^
If Hillary was president and Schumer was majority leader, he would be doing exactly what Mitch is doing. It would be idiotic if he didn’t. Why? Because that’s what always has happened.
So, they’re sexists? They won’t support a woman because she’s a woman?
One of these women is being given the chance to fulfill their dream of being on the Supreme Court. One would think they would support her in her moment of breaking through
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Yes and the Dems are all about standing on principals when things aren’t going their way.I liken this to Charlie Brown and Lucy and the football. They never have played fair and they aren’t planning on playing fair after the election.
N
Nepperhan
Guest
I explained how Trump got to make so many federal court nominations. McConnell created a backlog by not acting on those of Obama. Its not a difficult concept.
Obama appointed about 30 appellate court justices in his first term and 130 overall. Trump has appointed 154.
"Trump has appointed 53 appeals court judges to date, far higher than the number appointed by nearly every other recent president at the same point in their tenure. "
How Trump compares with other recent presidents in appointing federal judges
Donald Trump leaves the White House having appointed nearly as many appeals court judges in four years as Barack Obama appointed in eight.
www.pewresearch.org
" Trump’s success comes in part from the fact that the GOP holds a slim majority in the Senate, which confirms Trump’s picks. In addition, Republican senators in Obama’s first five years blocked three dozen judicial nominations, Politifact found. Democrats used a simple majority to pass most judicial confirmation votes, not a super-majority of 60.
“Nominations pretty much came to a halt until the start of the Trump administration when the Senate started quickly confirming his nominees,” University of Georgia law professor Susan Brodie Haire told the LA Times .
Trump Outdoes Obama In Federal Judge Appointments
The American Bar Association rated nearly 14 percent of Trump's nominees as "not qualified," a higher percentage than recent presidents.
www.newsweek.com
N
Nepperhan
Guest
You ignore the example of LBJ.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Well, they don’t change the threshold of 60 votes to a simple majority every day but point taken.
L
Link
Guest
Going to be very interesting if Biden wins and Democrats take back the senate and then add seats to the court. I for one will support that. I don’t like it. It feels dirty. But the GOP has proven to be shameless hypocrites without principles and they’ve been playing dirty this whole time. I look forward to the inevitable freak out by the GOP when they realize their actions backfired spectacularly.
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
No one is going to add seats to the Court.
FDR already tried it, it failed, and it’s pretty universally regarded by every person who’s been to law school as being a bad idea.
FDR already tried it, it failed, and it’s pretty universally regarded by every person who’s been to law school as being a bad idea.
R
Roselle
Guest
I guess to be more accurate of a description it is to be an October Democrat women’s march.
You ignore the overwhelming practice in this matter.JonNC:
You ignore the example of LBJ.
Ted Cruz on why Senate must confirm SCOTUS nominee before election: 'It's precedent'
Sen. Ted Cruz on Sunday made a case for why the Senate must confirm Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's successor before election day.
www.foxnews.com
Garland fits the precedent. So will Trump’s nominee
Last edited:
Yes, that is true.
Reference Harry Reid
It could end up bring a very big court. Someday the Republicans would take the WH and senate back.
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
Projection once again…
P
ProVobis
Guest
If only he had thought of that when the public option in the ACA was being debated. He didn’t get it with only 59 votes.
Would have been a game changer whether you agree with the public option or not.
Last edited:
Whether you agree with ACA or not.
I don’t , but that’s a different issue.
- Status