Posted on 02/15/2016 5:08:55 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Here we go, the biggest battle of the Obama Administration since Obamacare. With Antonin Scalia's passing, the wisest jurist of the past fifty years has left us. President Obama will quickly build his political machine to press the U.S. Senate, with help from every available media outlet, to support the idea of his appointing a liberal justice to replace Scalia.
This appointment will be dressed up as a "moderate," but with this opportunity before him, Obama will not waste the chance on a "moderate." The appointment would radically tip the Supreme Court away from the current balance of 5-4, away from constitutional restraint and in favor of judicial activism.
The new court could be expected to methodically unmake the American commitment to rule of law, as defined by applying constitutional text to facts, without political interference. The new court would soon become a politicized branch of the Federal government, locking in liberal congressional actions and creatively remaking laws.
In this way, the new court would seek to remake society in a liberal activist mold, objectively endorsed by only a fraction of America. This lurch to the Left politically -- remaking the definition of judicial review -- would decisively eviscerate 200 years of respected jurisprudence and institutional behavior -- what we call constitutional history.
So, how can it be stopped? What would our Founders, writers of the U.S. Constitution, say? The answer seems clear. But let us play out likely events, to see how dangerous this situation is. Within weeks, the president will loft a name and liberal groups will coo about the choice. Recorded endorsements of this nominee will be dragged out, especially for his or her inferior judicial confirmation. Senators will be called hypocrites for not now supporting him or her. Charges of racism or sexism can be expected.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The weight of history, prudence and democracy is with those who seek to preserve this decision for the next president, whoever that may be.
Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution — the so-called Appointments Clause — allows a president to appoint certain public officials, only with the “advice and consent” of the Senate. The operative word is “consent,” or the appointment is void.
Historically, Senate “consent” to any nominee for the U.S. Supreme Court is essential. Moreover, the higher the appointment and the closer to end of a president’s term, the more delay has been viewed as appropriate.
I really believe this was why Loretta Lynch was installed as AG, in case a Baraqqi partisan was needed for SCOTUS.
Black
Female
Harvard Law
Already pre-approved by this Senate 56-43
Well Republicans/conservatives, an unexpected shattering event has happened.
Scalia’s death not only will affect decisions of cases currently on the court docket, but have an impact on the presidential campaign.
If Obama is able.to appoint a liberal replacement, then there will be 5,solid liberals out of 9 justices on the court.
Every single bleeping case will be decided in favor of the liberals. And if the Democrats win the 2016 election, the liberals will control the Supreme Court perhaps for decades it the future.
The stakes are very high.
This may well be the hill worth dying on. If obama is allowed to appoint that 5th liberal, there may be no turning back.
But does anybody care that she was approved to be attorney general and not a Supreme Court justice?? She was approved for a very different job. How does it make sense to say that since she was confirmed to be AG that she should be fast tracked to the Supreme Court? These are the sorts of questions to out out there if Obama Nominstes her. For example, has she ever been a judge? Does she have judicial tempermant, other qualifications to be a judge???
Just asking........
What would the Democrats do if the roles were reversed?
Do the same.
Bookmarked.
Great questions.
None of which will matter to the MSM as the media tsunami to approve Lynch sweeps Republicans out of the way.
Anyone nominated by that anit-American sodomite Onambla had better be immediately DOA.
Simply stated....we will not consider any nominee of yours. Period.
Yes I’m sure there will be great pressures. The media will run with the meme that the GOP Senators have a responsibility to follow the process hold hearings etc. And also that there would have to be damn good reason to reject any obama nominee. But based on media criteria there would be no acceptable reason to reject any obamabot put forth.
If we are talking qualifications, remember both Clarence Thomas and Robert Bork were already sitting federal judges when nominated for the Supreme Court. Both seemingly well qualified at least in terms of being federal judges in good standing. Yet both confirmation events became circuses.
That won’t concern this out of control president. He will nominate and will strike a deal of some sort with McConnell.
Can someone tell how Scalia could be too weak for shoulder surgery but could go on a hunting trip??? It just keeps getting more hinky as time goes by
**After Scalia’s Demise: The Court Appointment Belongs to Next President**
YES!!!!!!!
-What would the Democrats do if the roles were reversed?-
Senate Dems would just pass another resolution as they did in 1960 that no SC appointments can be made in an election year.
Well the conspiracy theorists will be having a field day with this.
Not only that, but the Attorney General will only be Attorney General as long as Obama is POTUS. A Supreme Court Justice will be a Supreme Court Justice for life.
Some are saying that Scalia’s “shoulder injury” may not have been a shoulder injury. A shoulder injury might have impeded his ability to hunt given how a rifle operates.
The “shoulder injury” may have been a warning of heart problems.
Just saying.....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.