[sirthomasthemore]

Jack-

You raise some interesting legal points. Since you're familiar with the law, you know that, without research, it would be difficult to do justice to your points of law. Would the Dems argue that the filibuster is nothing more than extended debate (and not obstruction), and such extended debate is essential to the Senate's role to advise and consent.

But, I imagine it would be the Executive Branch that would have standing, and so, I don't see why the matter couldn't be adjudicated quickly in an application for mandatory injunction- or writ of mandamus- petitioning the District Court to compel the Senate to fulfill it's obligation under the Constitution.

It would be interesting to watch if the Senate reacted in the same fashion as the judiciary when confronted with the Schiavo issue- that is, to close ranks on a bi-partisan basis against the encroachment of the Executive of the Legislature.

But, I'd certainly would be willing to give it a go, since it's clear to me that this is a battle against "extremist" nominees- but merely obstruction by those who don't like the fact that the nominees are strict constructionists.

[sirthomasthemore]

There should be a way one can edit a prior post, w/o re-posting. Obviously, the above should read since it's clear to me that this is NOT a battle against "extremist" nominees-

My bad. :o)

[truth_seeker]

"But, I imagine it would be the Executive Branch that would have standing, and so, I don't see why the matter couldn't be adjudicated quickly in an application for mandatory injunction- or writ of mandamus- petitioning the District Court to compel the Senate to fulfill it's obligation under the Constitution."

Pretty doubtful a District Court, or even the Supreme Court would vote to compel Congress to act in a particular manner.

I would predict the courts would let Congress work out their internal rules by themselves. IOW if the Senate doesn't have the votes to change their rules, that's the Senate's prerogative.

So it rests in the hands of Senate leadership, and perhaps the persuasive skills of the President. As for the troubled nine, their pet projects and issues need not see the light of day.

And some may arguably be looking to a future time, when Republicans would wish to block appointments.