Should we wait?

[Salty]

Should Obama nominate a new Supreme court justice?

or should he take the advice of the "R's" and let the next administration make the nomination

Supposed this death occurred on 31 Dec of this year - (with only 20 days left in the term of the POTUS.)
)
Then should the POTUS refrain from a nomination? What would be the cutoff?

What would you think if the Senate gave the President a list of 5 men, that it would approve?

 

[preachinjesus]

No. Let the President submit his name for confirmation. Let the Senate confirm or deny that nominee.

 

[Rob_BW]

They borked Bork, and tried to bork Thomas, sooo.....

 

[Zaac]

Why would he wait? It doesn't even make sense for folks on the GOP side to suggest that he should wait.Cruz made some silly statement about how the replacement "should be a decision for the people". Can the people not make a decision NOW?

 

[Salty]

They borked Bork, and tried to bork Thomas, sooo.....

Very true

 

[Crabtownboy]

No, he should go ahead and appoint a new justice. There are a number of reasons for this, one being the country had too many needs to have a crippled court.

The GOP needs to be careful. Their actions so far indicate an unwise course that may well cost them votes in the coming election.

 

[TCassidy]

The unwritten rule in the Senate has been "no lame-duck nominations" for the past 5 decades.

"Let the people decide" is a good rule to follow. The people will decide who they want to be President next November. Let that person nominate the next justice.

I can't see why the Democrats are so upset. Unless they all think they are going to lose the election in November, both the White House and for control of the Senate.

 

[Zaac]

Unwritten tradition isn't the law. It's embarrassing that we can say that the Senate for five decades blocked Presidents from doing what they were elected to do just because of a tradition of being a "lame duck" President.

That they even bring it up is pitiful. The government doesn't stop just because folks in Congress think there is a lame duck President.

The PEOPLE elected the current President so they need to get out the way, stop playing partisan politics, and let the man do the job so many of them claims he does poorly.

For me, it's not about anyone winning or losing an election. The justice died under the current administration. Then the President of the current administration needs to do his job and nominate someone to replace Scalia.

So please, Ted Cruz and Donald Trump, and the GOP myrmidons, make this into a thing. What was already gonna be a November blowout will become a blowout and a SCOTUS appointee as the Dems stress the continued obstructionist behavior of the GOP lead Congress that began in earnest when Barack Obama took office.
Republican leaders said they want the President to fail at the beginning of his first term and have done everything they could to obstruct him doing his job.

• Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell: "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president."
• Rush Limbaugh: "I hope he fails."
• Tea Party favorite Rep. Michele Bachmann: "we’re hoping that President Obama’s policies don’t succeed."

Yet the GOP and their pundits would have folks believe that Barack Obama is the one dividing the country.

 

[Salty]

For nearly two hundred years there was no provision to replace a Vice-President - of which there is only one. There were 8 times in our Nations history that the office of Veep was vacant.
The Supreme Court still has eight justices - is it that urgent to immediately to fill the open seat?

 

[TCassidy]

The Supreme Court still has eight justices - is it that urgent to immediately to fill the open seat?

The only reason I can see for the Democrat's desire to violate their own rules is that they believe they will lose both the White House and not regain control of the Senate. They seem desperate.

 

[Crabtownboy]

What would you think if the Senate gave the President a list of 5 men, that it would approve?

Just like you and me if we were president, we would ignore them.

 

[Crabtownboy]

For nearly two hundred years there was no provision to replace a Vice-President - of which there is only one. There were 8 times in our Nations history that the office of Veep was vacant.
The Supreme Court still has eight justices - is it that urgent to immediately to fill the open seat?

In any case already heard but not announced the SC vote is basically null and void. The lower court rulings would stand until they are heard again and voted on ... and that might never happen. Many of the cases were brought to the SC because conservatives did not like the lower court ruling. However, those rulings would now stand.

Any future rulings that end in a 4-4 vote also leave the lower courts ruling in force. Again this will give many conservatives heart burn as they did not like the lower court ruling and brought it before the SC.

Guess it depends on your view point on those rulings.

Also, you might end up with a much more liberal sc justice if you wait and the election goes badly for the GOP and conservatives. Do you want to take that risk?

 

[Rob_BW]

Also, you might end up with a much more liberal sc justice if you wait and the election goes badly for the GOP and conservatives. Do you want to take that risk?

Alea iacta est.

 

[Zaac]

For nearly two hundred years there was no provision to replace a Vice-President - of which there is only one. There were 8 times in our Nations history that the office of Veep was vacant.
The Supreme Court still has eight justices - is it that urgent to immediately to fill the open seat?

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.

 

[TCassidy]

Alea iacta est.

I don't think so, at least not yet. Let's wait and see how it works out before casting any dies.

 

[TCassidy]

At any time other than election year, folks in the GOP would think so.

Except both parties agreed to the rule.

 

[Rob_BW]

I don't think so, at least not yet. Let's wait and see how it works out before casting any dies.

Lol, I'm not advocating any violence. The death is the die, it has been cast and will not be undone. Or maybe a poker analogy would have been better, ie the cards have been dealt, there's nothing left to do but to play them.

 

[Salty]

Just like you and me if we were president, we would ignore them.

( basic statement was - Senate sends recommendation to President)
I would not necessary ignore them. If they sent me a good candidate, I would approve.
remember the COTUS states "advise and consent" notice - advise comes first.....

 

[TCassidy]

I would not necessary ignore them.

I would. For the Senate to send such a message to the White House would violate the separation of powers.

 

[Salty]

I would. For the Senate to send such a message to the White House would violate the separation of powers.

How?