The Fortas Filibuster and the Stevens Seat

The American Spectator ^ | Tuesday, April 13, 2010 | Jeffrey Lord

[old school]

"Running on opposition to expansion of the Commerce Clause has now been turned by the Obama White House from complicated legalese into an easily understandable problem thanks to the presence of the individual mandate in the ObamaCare health bill. In almost bumper sticker fashion, Obama is asking whether voters support the idea of being forced by the government to buy something they don't want. And connecting this issue to confirmation of a new Supreme Court nominee."

[old school]

Lengthy but on point!

[Tarpon]

Any SC nominee should recuse themselves from the Obamacare lawsuits. Simple solutions ...

A justice of character would instinctively know that.

[bigbob]

Thanks for this reminder of a piece of history many of us lived through, but perhaps few understood at the time.

I think this is the key sentence:

“Republican senators, discerning the historic rebellion against a liberal Supreme Court, stepped up to the plate and did the unheard of — threatening and carrying through with the threat of a Senate filibuster”

Will we see Republican stepping up to the plate in 2010?

[old school]

I would guess that it is a part of history which few, if any, of our current senators know or understand!

[Jacquerie]

Excellent post!

Why should Senators whose own careers were ended because of their health care votes be entitled to put a Supreme Court Justice on the bench who will use the court to do what the Senators themselves were un-elected for supporting?

Conservatives have the issues and momentum to keep a barking moonbat off Scotus. It is bare knuckle time bros.

[Senator_Blutarski]

One observation: Back in 1968 the mainstream media still allowed Repubicans a voice. Heck, in 1968 there were still a few conservatives actually employed in the MSM. It was common in 1968 to see both sides of the story in print.

This tactic will be much more difficult to pull off today in the face of a hostile and dishonest liberal media.

I'll also add that the electorate back then was more knowledgeable of constitutional issues.