Posted on 04/05/2017 12:24:26 PM PDT by Kaslin
Sen. Jeff Merkley spoke for over 15 hours, protesting the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch, saying how this seat on the high court is stolen, and that the integrity of the courts would be undermined for decades if the Senate confirms him. Yes, a man who received the American Bar Associations highest rating is going to denigrate the courts. This is bath salts logic, but Merkley has been one of Gorsuchs early (and vocal) opponents. Hes from a blue state. And his base is frothing at the mouth to go all-out war, even in the face of defeat. Tomorrow, its likely that the Senate GOP will nuke the filibuster rules, allowing Gorsuch, an eminently qualified candidate with impeccable academic credentials to go along with it, to be confirmed by a simple majority.
Before that happens, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) decided to launch a counterstrike against the liberal hysteria, torching his Democratic colleagues for their hypocrisy over this unprecedented filibuster. His first target was Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), who said that you couldnt just filibuster a SCOTUS nominee just because you disagree with him or her. She said this in 2006, when some Senate Democrats were mulling blocking Samuel Alito. The Arkansas Senator also cited President Obama, who was a senator at the time—for joining the effort to block Alito.
Sen. Cotton Cites Hypocrisy From Feinstein On SCOTUS Filibuster
Sen. Cotton Goes Through Litany Of Dems Hypocrisy On SCOTUS Filibuster
Even those who oppose Judge Gorsuch used to sing a different tune about the standards for judicial confirmation. For instance, the senior senator from California put it best when she said: "I think when it comes to filibustering a Supreme Court appointment, you really have to have something out there, whether it's gross moral turpitude or something that comes to the surface." Speaking of a previous Republican president's nominee, she further said, "Now, I mean, this is a man I might disagree with. That doesn't mean he shouldn't be on the court."In fact, President Obama filibustered a Supreme Court nomination while he was a senator, yet later expressed regret over that decision. He said, "I think that, historically, if you look at it, regardless of what votes particular senators have taken, there's been a basic consensus, a basic understanding, that the Supreme Court is different. And each caucus may decide who's going to vote where and what but that basically you let the vote come up, and you make sure that a well-qualified candidate is able to join the bench, even if you don't particularly agree with them."
Cotton added that Democrats were very different animals last year, where they said they would invoke the nuclear option to get Hillary Clintons nominees through should she win the election. Donald Trumps upset victory torpedoed those plans. He cited Reids remarks about nuking the rules for non-SOCTUS judicial nominations, setting the foundation for confirming Supreme Court nominees by a simple majority. He also read past statements by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), who also made similar overtures about the Supreme Court and the nuclear option last year.
The Constitution does not give me the right to block a qualified nominee no matter whos in the White House…a minority in the Senate should not be able to block qualified nominees, said Cotton, reading the past remarks of Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM).
Yeah, Senate Democrats are just bitter that Trump is president, and that Republicans blocked Merrick Garland—Obamas initial nominee to fill the vacancy left by the late Antonin Scalia. Well, you cant always get what you want, folks. And now not only will Gorsuch be confirmed, but also should a second vacancy occur (one that does alter the balance of the Court)—it wont be much of a fight.
I for one actually believe the “Nuclear Option” is actually playing into the demoRATS hands. Schumer wants the Nuclear Option but does not come out and say it. Why? He is under firm belief the next nomination, while highly speculated to happen in the near future due to the Justices ages, will not happen until a demoRAT is in the WH. With the Nuclear Option firmly in play, then no individual in the Senate could stop a SCOTUS nomination through filibuster. Which is the whole point as dems have been arguing against the filibuster for many years. Schumer isn’t for the Nuclear Option because the dems aren’t in control. However, if they were he would be firmly in favor of it. Since Reagan the dems have been trying to get rid of the filibuster in its entirety. Pubs think they are in control when they have a majority but even now the dems play them like a fiddle at a country ho down.
Garland would have given the Court a solid 5 vote bloc of leftists until Ruth Bader Ginsburg departs from the scene. The only good point was that he was somewhat older than some of the other people Obama could have picked. For once the Republicans did not cave.
That was then. There are still 48 hours left for them to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory (i.e. Collins, Murkowski, maybe McCain could vote against enacting the "nuclear" option.)
wtf
Why didn’t the GOP simply allow a vote on Garland and defeat it?
Says a guy who would have gleefully blocked a Republican court nominee under the same circumstances were the shoes on the other feet - a GOP President with a Dem Senate in an election year. They would have done precisely the same thing...Biden had already announced that would be their policy. They are only upset about it because they were expecting to win a solid majority which did not materialize and the Republicans only lost 2 seats even with a horrifically dangerous map for them along with Hillary being elected President...neither of these things materialized.
Dem RATs had no reservations about packing the court with their own and are furious they missed the opportunity to do exactly that.
As Limbaugh mentioned today, it’s pointless to accuse miscreants of being hypocrites.
We need more than 4-4.
We need nine Justices.
And we need a constitutionalist in seat #9. And in whatever seat opens up next.
The current filibuster, nuclear option, situation is a non starter for whether or not to make use of either or both. There can be no doubt that the democrats will reverse themselves to suit any given stand they may have previously taken on any given issue. Of course they would invoke the nuclear rules as needed and cast themselves as saviors of America for doing so. The Republicans should know that they must do what is called for in any situation without giving a second thought to what the democrats want or do not want done. That open SC seat needs to be gotten now, let the chips fall.
Actually seven would be more than enough.
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.