Should we wait?

[TCassidy]

Because the function of the Senate is to advise and consent. The nomination is entirely in the purview of the Executive Branch.

The term "Advise and Consent" is legalize which describes one of two situations, either where the executive branch signs a law previously approved of by the legislative branch or where the legislative branch approves of a nomination previously presented by the executive branch.

They "advise" the President to sign a law they have passed or they "consent" to a nomination made by the President.

 

[InTheLight]

At any time other than election year, folks in the GOP would think so. Y'all need to stop with the obvious politics. The seat is vacant. It's the sitting President's responsibility to nominate someone to fill the vacancy.

Yep. I've got to believe if the situation were reversed and the GOP held the Presidency with 11 months to go they would be in favor of nominating a justice. Their argument would be that the people already voted on a president to perform this duty when he was elected 3 years ago.

 

[Salty]

Now, if it happened after the election......

 

[preachinjesus]

The irony here is that, in all likelihood, the severely diminished power of the current President could bring a solid middle of the road candidate whereas the possibility is real that the next Democratic President with a mandate could nominate someone severely to the left of the Court.

Personally, I believe the GOP leadership is playing hardball because they know they'll have to confirm a nominee before summer. So they want to get someone that isn't crazy.

Since the current GOP field doesn't seem to have the strength to beat Democrat nominee Clinton, her choice could be much worse than what is currently on the bench. The GOP needs to confirm by summer.

 

[Revmitchell]

What we need is a solid conservative on the court. One who is a strict originalist. Anything short of that should be denied.

 

[Zaac]

Yep. I've got to believe if the situation were reversed and the GOP held the Presidency with 11 months to go they would be in favor of nominating a justice. Their argument would be that the people already voted on a president to perform this duty when he was elected 3 years ago.

Exactly!Thumbsup

 

[Zaac]

The irony here is that, in all likelihood, the severely diminished power of the current President could bring a solid middle of the road candidate whereas the possibility is real that the next Democratic President with a mandate could nominate someone severely to the left of the Court.

Personally, I believe the GOP leadership is playing hardball because they know they'll have to confirm a nominee before summer. So they want to get someone that isn't crazy.

Since the current GOP field doesn't seem to have the strength to beat Democrat nominee Clinton, her choice could be much worse than what is currently on the bench. The GOP needs to confirm by summer.

Absolutely correct. I don't think they are thinking like this. But rather are thinking about their Senate seats and future elections. If they are viewed as having compromised with Obama on anything, their heads might be on the chopping block.

 

[Zaac]

What we need is a solid conservative on the court. One who is a strict originalist. Anything short of that should be denied.

This continued obstructionist approach and a Donald Trump or Ted Cruz nomination may prevent that.