if stevens goes - and the rats fillibuster until 2008, then what would the balance be if we had to run a USC with the remaining bunch?
And epluribus_2 also wrote:
if stevens goes - and the rats fillibuster until 2008, then what would the balance be if we had to run a USC with the remaining bunch?
There need be _no_ long-term vacancies on the Supreme Court. And, there need be _no_ more filibusters of any Supreme Court nominee, no matter how hard-right conservative that individual may be.
G.W. Bush should bite the bullet, and at the very first sign of a filibuster, make RECESS APPOINTMENTS to fill his Supreme Court seats.
This is completely legal and Constitutional, and he has every right to do so under the laws of our land.
The Democrats and media will SCREAM. Let them.
Once seated by recess appointment, I'm not sure of exactly what "route" permanent confirmation must [Constitutionally] take. But I believe that using the recess-appointment "weapon" will - in practicality - FORCE upon the Senate the obligation, at some point, to conduct an up-or-down, majority-wins vote.
As a historical note, Earl Warren (whom Eisenhower considered to be his "greatest mistake") was in fact originally seated by a recess appointment to the post of Chief Justice.
This is what G.W. Bush _should_ do to thwart the obstructionists.
But it is also what he _won't_ do...
Cheers!
- John
let's see if stevens goes, o'connor goes...and then GWB tells Rehnquist that he doesn't accept his resignation...then...the math could start to get interesting....
They only have to FB until the 2006 senate elections. If the Pubs don't act with any spinal fortitude, they will likely lose in 2006 and the balance of power will shift in the senate. If that's the case, we're in trouble.