Posted on 03/16/2016 1:52:04 PM PDT by Innovative
Obama on Wednesday nominated Merrick Garland to serve on the Supreme Court, setting up a protracted political fight with Republicans who have vowed to block any candidate picked by Obama in his final year in office.
Garland, 63, is a longtime Washington lawyer and jurist who is chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Considered a moderate, Garland is widely respected in the D.C. legal community and was also a finalist for the first two Supreme Court vacancies Obama filled.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I just hope Republicans stick to their original decision and not allow Obama to name a 3rd Supreme Court justice.
Since the GOPe is planning to sabotage Trump, why get the people upset ahead of time?
The pro-abortion squad likes to stick together!
Wonderful, he's a moderate, that's exactly what we are looking for. He'll be fair, he'll be considerate of the fact and the law. It'll be glorious, his decisions will put smiles on everyone and we will live in harmony for everlasting.
Don't believe what the media are saying for a minute, he has been carefully groomed and coached for years to appear to be the ideal candidate. Just like Senator Barack Obama. Remember how that turned out?
Ouch!
Judge Garland evidently got his state sovereignty-ignoring law school indoctrination at Harvard, corrections welcome.
Hahhahaha hey Obamunist— nominate THIS!!!!!
the RINOs are feeling too job secure.
“Considered a moderate”
Compared to who, Stalin? The press said the same thing about Breyer and Ginzburg. How “moderate” did they turn out?
The guy is a far left liberal or he wouldn’t have been nominated. He will vote just like the wise Latina.
“The guy is a far left liberal or he wouldn’t have been nominated. “
I am sure you are right. That is why Republicans must not fall into the trap and consider and approve him.
Let the next president nominate the next SC judge. We just hope and need to make sure it’s not Hillary.
I wonder if they will cave? They usually do.
*like*
IF the Republicans lose their majority in the Senate, then the new Congress is sworn in about Jan 3 (IIRC). With a Demoncrat majority, Schumer takes over as Majority Leader and announces they will dispense with hearings (because this is a good guy and the Republicans are obstructionists). Cruz or someone else announces a filibuster, at which time Schumer announces a rules change that prevents filibusters of SC nominees. They then schedule and hold a vote, confirm Garland just days before Obama leaves office.
Does anyone see how this can not work?
Of course, if Hillary wins, they won't have to bother to do that.
The bottom line is that we have to work to get EVERY Republican senator elected (or re-elected), even if they are a total RINO. Fight in the primary, vote strategically in the general.
Well said and reasoned. I totally agree.
The country is at stake.
Agreed. They’re offering a pig in a poke.
These were the words of the media, I’m guessing that you are up to the sleight of the hand that the media are wont to deliver to the unwashed masses.
Based only on this man’s name, I vote no!
Call me namist.
I care not.
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.