Posted on 04/03/2017 12:11:09 PM PDT by Kaslin
” What are the stakes here” ?
Bimbo
We win no matter which way they go.
Popcorn...
bttt
Go ahead and nuke the filibuster. It will make replacing Ginsberg with an originialist that much easier.
When is the media going to start reporting actual news?
McConnell will think he saved a cherished Senate tradition, when he is really sabotaging Republican control of the Supreme Court.
-PJ
Probably never. Shows like that are just parodies of ‘The View’ with lipstick.
Now, they get to say "oh, we were being silly."
Do you really think McConnell blocked the Merrick Garland nomination just to do that? LOL.
Yes, I am hoping we get to “go nuclear” now and do away with the filibuster. Then the upcoming SCOTUS battles will be much easier. Which is why the ‘rats are idiots to pick this fight now, although the outcome will not be any different if they wait ‘till next time.
p.s. The Republicans have NO NEED for the filibuster for SCOTUS nominees by any future Democrap POTUS, because they will never use it!! So getting rid of the filibuster is a 100% winning move for the Republicans. They risk nothing.
Well with the fencepost turtle McConnell, it’s certainly possible.
But let’s hope he wouldn’t be so spineless and stooopid as that....
There's on damn "balance" on the USSC, there's globalist, leftist, Haaaavard grads taking this country further and further away from the Constitution every chance they get by "discovering implied" rights.
Until we have a President that will put nothing but original intent judges on the court so there's at least a six to three majority who laws in light of the Constitution the same way Justice Thomas does our only chance is for Congress to start making laws that explicitly state said law is not within the jurisdiction of the USSC.
What are the odds of Congress growing a pair vs. the odds of getting a President who has a pair?
Yes.
1. Reid was still the minority leader when McConnell blocked Garland, not Schumer. Reid had a long history of reneging on promises with McConnell.
2. Garland would have been a flip of the court, Left for Right. McConnell HAD to do that with an election coming up.
3. Gorsuch is not a flip of the court, so McConnell could very well trade away the future flip to keep the Court status quo now (and in the future), and keep the so-called traditions of the Senate intact.
4. McConnell is probably betting that the next SCOTUS nomination will come after the 2018 mid-term election, where the make-up of the Senate will be different because Democrats have to defend 12 seats in Republican-won states. Therefore, he's only focused on this confirmation now, thinking that a promise in the future will become mooted by events.
-PJ
Thank you, Democrats, for your being willing to be so clearly identified as rejecting a person whose record and promises indicated a fidelity to that Constitution's protections, as intended by its framers and those who ratified it.
There is no place to get ‘original intent’ judges in the tradition of America’s first 150 or more years.
Most Originalists really are not.
We could do a Hell of a lot worse than guys like Thomas and if that’s the best we can do it’s orders of magnitude better than anything we’ve had in a long, long, time.
Thomas is generally very quiet because he understands how rare his underlying judicial philosophy is.
Something else to consider is that a lot of business and industry groups are pushing hard to get Gorsuch approved. These are the core of the GOPe's financial supporters.
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.