[crusher]

I have managed to avoid all of the "debates" thus far. Since none of the candidates are close to my perspective -- all are far too Leftish for me (I think Cruz may be the closest, but even he comes up short; none of the others are worth my spit)-- I presume we are seeing the demise of the Republic. We are already a post-Constitutional regime which will become even more accelerated with the Scalia succession theatrics.

Who knew I was too optimistic when musing about the eventual demise of the USA? It is here!

[MarvinStinson]

We have been hanging on by our fingernails and it was actually Justice Scalias hand to whom those fingernails belonged.

[Dalberg-Acton]

Obama already has a nominee and it's a white guy!

[FlingWingFlyer]

Republican leaders cannot afford to screw this one up.

Good article. Thanks.

[tx_eggman]

I look for Obama to nominate Joe Biden. If he does, I don’t think the Republican Senate has the balls the stop him from being confirmed.

[Political Junkie Too]

Still, we imagine that the case can and will be made that allowing the first lame-duck-year Supreme Court appointment in the history of the nation would be a terribly divisive thing to do.

George Washington appointed South Carolina judge John Rutledge as Chief Justice of the United States during a congressional recess in 1795. Rutledge was already an Associate Justice.

New Jersey judge William J. Brennan was appointed to the Supreme Court by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956 through a recess appointment. This was done in part with an eye on the presidential campaign that year; Eisenhower was running for reelection, and his advisors thought it would be politically advantageous to place a northeastern Catholic on the court. Brennan was promptly confirmed when the Senate came back into session.

1795 was the 7th year of Washington's Presidency. There was no "lame duck" back then.

1956 was the end of Eisenhower's first term. Not "lame duck" in the purest sense, unless he chose not to run again like LBJ did in 1968.

The Brennan case might be an example of a path forward. If Obama nominates and the Senate blocks, and then if Obama recess appoints in the December window between the 114th and 115th Congresses, then the next President should not wait for the recess-appointed Justice to step down at the end of 2017 to make his appointment.

The next President should make his permanent nomination early in 2017 and let the Senate confirm. Then, it will be up to the "lame duck" Justice to either succumb to pressure and step down early to let the duly confirmed Justice take over, or defiantly remain on the Court to the bitter end, when the earlier confirmed Justice will then be sworn in.

-PJ

[Pilgrim's Progress]

Could someone post a thread and give a basic explanation of how Harry Reid’s nuclear option will affect the nomination process . . . and does it favor the Republicans?

[I want the USA back]

A disaster. 0 gets to appoint another unqualified America-hating leftist and the republicans will just cave.

[RedStateRocker]

If parties and circumstances were reversed, does ANYONE think the Republican president would wait until the next term to give their successor (potentially a Democrat) a chance to nominate? Expecting Obama to not nominate a SCOTUS is naive at best.

[grumpygresh]

Lynch might be hoping for the job. She probably followed orders to put the hit on Scalia

[Jacquerie]

Most of the appellate courts are Leftist bastions.

With Scalia gone, what would have been 5-4 decisions will be 4-4 and the lower court rulings will stand. Just getting rid of him will work out to be just about as good as replacing him with a leftist.

How convenient for Obama’s execrable legacy the untimely death of a rock-solid constitutionalist.