Posted on 09/19/2020 2:48:08 PM PDT by Libloather
**SNIP**
Senate Republicans have a 53 to 47 majority, and they abolished the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations in 2017. They can confirm a new justice even if they lose three of their own members and win zero Democrats (in which case, Vice President Mike Pence would cast the tie-breaking vote.)
Democrats would need to convince four Republicans to vote against the nomination to block it. Failing that, progressives say their only method of retaliation would be to capture the White House and Congress and add seats to the Supreme Court.
On a call with Democratic senators Saturday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who would take over the chamber if his party wins control, kept that option open.
"Let me be clear: if Leader McConnell and Senate Republicans move forward with this, then nothing is off the table for next year. Nothing is off the table," he said, according to a source on the call.
Schumer wasn’t specific but Democratic aides interpreted his remarks as a reference to expanding the number of seats on the court. Congress has changed the size of the court before - but not since 1869, when it was last expanded from seven to nine.
**SNIP**
The election is in 44 days, but the next Congress isn't sworn in for 106 days. Republicans could use the lame duck session to confirm a justice. Some conservatives expect a confirmation hearing before the Nov. 3 election and a final vote after the election.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
and their RINO friends.
Justices do NOT have to have a law degree.
Yeah, Democrats should remember that they can thank Harry Reid for doing that.
You certainly have been arguing for that, over & over.
I think it’s a terrible idea.
Racial politics is wrong, sexual politics is wrong.
We pick the best candidate because we will hopefully have them for 35 years.
We are replacing a woman so if there are equally qualified candidates perhaps a small favoring of a woman. Remember we already have two dreadful women left on the SC. We need a strong conservative & it doesn’t matter what the sex of the nominee. Justice Thomas is growing old and none of the others is as dependable. That should be the focus.
Let's see, Democrats say that 1973's Roe v Wade is "settled law" but changing the court size in 1869 is not. Doncha just love the consistency of Democrats?
I expect a Supreme Court to have 1,467,312 jurists by the year 2050.
No, wait, 1,467,313. In case there’s a tie.
A truthful headline would read:
Democrats have no legal options to stop a third Trump USSC appointee
RBG replacement must be confirmed before the election. The ‘Rats have plans, backup plans and more sedition on the menu to cause mayhem in the electoral process. We absolutely need a complete 9 judge SCOTUS because this contested election will have case after case brought before it. An even number is not acceptable.
There was never anything “off the table” anyway. They’ve already said they were going to do the court packing scheme and their history shows there is no sheer power play they won’t do. Sorry Chuck, but these are the standards you’ve already set.
The dems don’t need to stop this....there’s more than a few rino losers that’ll vote no.
The original court consisted of just six.
Even number. 8-)
They could threaten to impeach...no...wait...
Why is roe v wade stare decisis, but dred Scott isn’t?
Collins is losing in the polls by double digits. She’s toast.
You have to have 51 votes.
“Stinking... liars. It was the evil rat Harry Reid that got rid of the filibuster.”
The 2013 change did not apply to Supreme Court nominations. That change WAS made by Republicans in 2017.
“Senate Republicans have a 53 to 47 majority, and they abolished the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations in 2017.”
Harry Reid did that, not the Republicans. He went Nuclear first.
What is your point? Did the original SCOTUS decide every challenged ballot and electoral vote in the early days? The Democrats have an army of attorneys today, intending to do just that. It will drag out the election results for more than a month.
Are you saying you think the court should remain with 8 justices until next year or forever?
There is ZERO Constitutional requirement for ‘hearings’ relative to judicial appointments. NONE. ZIP. NADA.
Turtle could take Trump’s nominee straight to the full Senate.
The only thing this would ‘cost’ is the preening fools on the Senate Judiciary committee would miss out on the ‘sound-bite’ posturing.
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.