Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

VANITY- A question for legal scholars about Supreme Court nominees.
Aimhigh ^ | 04/09/2022 | aimhigh

Posted on 04/09/2022 2:49:04 PM PDT by aimhigh

Here is a scary question for the legal eagles:

Judge Jackson is now approved by the Senate to take the next vacancy, which won’t occur until Justice Breyer steps down. He will step down in a couple months.

What is to stop Biden from getting 4 more judges approved now, to fill future openings?


TOPICS: Conspiracy
KEYWORDS: couplemonths; coupleofmonths; nominees; supremecourt; vanity

1 posted on 04/09/2022 2:49:04 PM PDT by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

I’m pretty sure that there has to be an opening before he can appoint anyone. Otherwise what is the point?


2 posted on 04/09/2022 2:51:20 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Inside every liberal is a blood-thirsty fascist yearning to be free of current societal constraints.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Unless 4 state they are going to retire from the Supreme Court, and that retirement will be within this year, I would say the chances are slim to none with none leading the pack right now.


3 posted on 04/09/2022 2:53:08 PM PDT by Robert DeLong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

“...What is to stop Biden...”
-
The U.S. Congress.


4 posted on 04/09/2022 2:54:09 PM PDT by Repeal The 17th (Get out of the matrix and get a real life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th

You left out your sarcasm tag at the end of your post.


5 posted on 04/09/2022 2:59:06 PM PDT by Deaf Smith (When a Texan takes his chances, chances will be taken that's for sure.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

The way I see it, there is NO Vacancy on the Supreme Court and the dog and pony show they put on appointed her to NOTHING. Nothing stops the US Senate from telling her to go pound sand and require a NEW Nominee be put forth when there is actually a Vacancy on the court.

In other words it’s all a ruse and a scam for the peasants to feast on.


6 posted on 04/09/2022 3:00:01 PM PDT by eyeamok (founded in cynicism, wrapped in sarcasm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
I believe it is highly unusual to pre-appoint a Supreme Court Justice, as was done here.

But Progressives believe the Constitution and traditions are things to be "worked around".

7 posted on 04/09/2022 3:00:40 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Repeal The 17th
“...What is to stop Biden...”

The U.S. Congress.

Uh-oh! We're in worse shape than I thought!

8 posted on 04/09/2022 3:00:53 PM PDT by JimRed (TERM LIMITS, NOW! Militia to the border! TRUTH is the new HATE SPEECH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Expanding the court needs to go through Congress unless Biden goes Pelican Brief.

Regardless, Article III was the biggest mistake that the members of the 1787 Constitutional Convention made/ratified.


9 posted on 04/09/2022 3:01:26 PM PDT by rollo tomasi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Here’s another hypothetical. Suppose that for some reason Breyer is still on the bench after the election. Could a Republican controlled senate revoke Brown’s confirmation?


10 posted on 04/09/2022 3:03:15 PM PDT by clintonh8r (Truth is hate speech to those who hate the truth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

I pray he does not retire. If he care a bit about his country, he will not. Imagine being replaced by someone with so little experience and with a horrendous agenda as big as all outdoors. You bring up a good point, though. The opening should happen before the appointment of a new judge. They have put the cart before the horse and it should have no legal standing as binding on anyone.


11 posted on 04/09/2022 3:35:15 PM PDT by Seeing More Clearly Now ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

If I recall correctly, Sandra Day O’Connor stayed on the Court until the day Justice Alito was sworn in to replace her. So that nomination was done before the justice who announced retirement had actually left the court.

Remember that was an unusual situation, in that, Justice Rehnquist died after O’Connor announced plans to retire, and then Bush had two Supreme Court seats to fill. John Roberts and Sam Alito were confirmed a few months apart, as I recall. Roberts took his seat promptly because Rehnquist had died, but O’Connor stayed until Alito was confirmed.


12 posted on 04/09/2022 3:36:46 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Would have to change this law:

28 U.S. Code § 1
The Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, any six of whom shall constitute a quorum.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 869.)

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/1?msclkid=9636f9ecb85511eca7148afe60f4bd71


13 posted on 04/09/2022 3:37:59 PM PDT by nicollo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Thanks.


14 posted on 04/09/2022 3:42:53 PM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Don’t get carried away with that. Breyer has officially announced his retirement effective the end of this session. For some reason, someone came out with that meme, and people think it is deep thinking.


15 posted on 04/09/2022 4:00:18 PM PDT by odawg (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nicollo
Would have to change this law: 28 U.S. Code § 1

My question isn't about packing the court. My question is about pre-approving nominees for future openings.

16 posted on 04/09/2022 4:13:35 PM PDT by aimhigh (THIS is His commandment . . . . 1 John 3:23)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

Here’s a scarier thought.
Is she* approved for Justice Breyers seat, or just the next vacancy?
I guess it wouldn’t really matter though. If someone were to get Scalia’ed the nominee will still be radical left.


17 posted on 04/09/2022 4:33:25 PM PDT by Do_Tar (To my NSA handler: Just kidding.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh

PN1783 — Ketanji Brown Jackson — Supreme Court of the United States

Ketanji Brown Jackson, of the District of Columbia, to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, vice Stephen G. Breyer, retiring.

https://www.congress.gov/nomination/117th-congress/1783


I’m assuming “vice” means “replacing”


18 posted on 04/09/2022 5:29:35 PM PDT by nicollo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi

Congress could limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts, thus reducing the cases and matters that the Supreme Court hears on appeal.


19 posted on 04/09/2022 8:24:04 PM PDT by FoxInSocks ("Hope is not a course of action." — M. O'Neal, USMC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson