Posted on 11/18/2016 8:51:37 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
The following piece was posted on the Washington Post site on 11/14/16.
by Jonathan H. Adler
Once he assumes office, President Donald Trump is expected to promptly nominate someone to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. This, along with subsequent nominations to the Supreme Court and lower courts, will be among his most consequential decisions.
During the campaign, Trump initially identified two appellate court judges — Diane Sykes of the 7th Circuit and William Pryor of the 11th Circuit — as the sort of individuals he would name to the high court to replace Scalia. Later during the campaign, Trump released a list of 11 names — later expanded to 21 — of potential nominees.
Senate Democrats are unlikely to be particularly pleased with any Trump nomination, particularly after Senate Republicans refused to consider President Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland. Given Republican control of the Senate, however, they may not be able to do much about it. (And, just for the record, let me reiterate that President Obama lacks the power to bypass the Senate on the Garland nomination.)
Back in 2013, after Republicans filibustered Democratic nominees as Democrats had filibustered Republican nominees, then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) invoked the “nuclear option,” eliminating the filibuster for lower court and executive branch nominees. As a technical matter, Reid’s move (accomplished by a simple, party-line majority vote) left the filibuster in place for Supreme Court nominees, but there was little question that such a filibuster would not last.
Just one month ago, Reid indicated that Senate Democrats — were they to obtain control of the Senate — would not allow Republicans to filibuster...
(Excerpt) Read more at thecoachsteam.com ...
He should also pre-emptively nominate Ruth Buzzie Ginsbergs replacement, as she is essentially at death’s door.
Poor democrats you lost.
What was Ginsberg thinking? Should’ve retired and been replaced by Obama, not knowing the future. It’s got to be a God thing.
I can easily think of at lease half a dozen Republicans who will vote against removing the filibuster for Supreme Court nominees.
I'm thinking that sometimes the leftist ego trumps the duty to execute the leftist agenda.
If the GOP wouldn't allow Garland a hearing what makes you think they would have allowed a Ginsburg replacement a hearing?
Yep, at least that many.
We'll just stay at 8 until Ginsberg dies and then we'll have a more reasonable 7.
Or possibly she doesn’t have any respect for Obama. Broken clock.
TRUMP should nominate Don Willett the guy that mocked him on Twitter
“Dingy Harry is about to learn the hard way a lesson republicans have also learned the hard way.”
Reid is gone. He doesn’t really care what happens at this point. He got his and that’s all that counts.
Mcconnell sucks! He said he wants to go back to needing 60 votes even for lower judges. I can’t stand him.
I suspect that they will have to drag her stiffening corpse off the bench before she ever steps down voluntarily.
Don’t count on McCain, Graham, Flake and other assorted RINOS to have the filibuster removed.
Oh for God’s sake, if it wasn’t for McConnell’s brilliant gamble, Garland would be sitting on a liberal court RIGHT NOW.
We have to suffer under the tyranny of Ginsburg and the grotesquely unqualified social justice warrior Sotomayor.
Another Scalia would be nice.
Hmmm. I still don’t trust him.
Look ppl, if not for McConnell there would BE no nomination because the court would be full.
And why nominate a hard core conservative, who may not get confirmed, occupy lots of coverage, waste time, WHEN YOU DON’T EVEN KNOW IF THEY’LL STAY CONSERVATIVE a la Roberts.
Nominate a right of center, confirmable judge and hope there is no drift leftward once on the court. Done.
Yes, this THIS is the article to read, and I have never in my life wanted so much to reply to old comment threads. You simply must read some of them. We shall honor Harry Reid, despite his unhinged mind, with the Reid precedent. Certainly for cabinet confirmations, and likely for the supreme court. http://forums.talkingpointsmemo.com/t/discussion-harry-reids-parting-shot-dems-will-nuke-the-filibuster-for-scotus/45690
Barely a month ago they were talking about how they would gleefully go ‘nuclear’ when they take back the senate.
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.