Posted on 10/22/2020 6:48:31 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
The Republican-led Senate Judiciary Committee has approved Judge Amy Coney Barrett’s nomination to the Supreme Court, sending the matter to the full Senate for consideration.
Democrats on the committee boycotted the vote Thursday, resulting in a 12-0 vote in favor of the nomination.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer reiterated his party’s objection to President Donald Trump moving ahead with replacing the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the court so close to an election, arguing that such a move should be left to whichever candidate wins the November 3 U.S. presidential election.
He cited the Supreme Court vacancy in 2016, when then-President Barack Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland but Senate Republicans blocked the process while making similar arguments about letting voters decide who should pick the next justice.
“When Merrick Garland was nominated, eight months before an election, we have to wait for an election. Now that an election is ongoing, we are rushing through this nomination. It is one of the worst moments the Senate has ever seen,” Schumer said.
He called Barrett’s confirmation proceedings “the most rushed, most partisan and least legitimate process in the history of Supreme Court nominations.”
Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham said the Democrats boycotting the vote “does a disservice to Judge Barrett who deserves a vote, up or down.”
With Republicans holding a 53-47 majority in the Senate, Graham expressed optimism about the prospects for Barrett’s nomination.
“Judge Barrett deserves to be on the Supreme Court and she will be confirmed,” he said.
The 12 Republicans on the committee have indicated they will back Barrett.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell plans to follow the Judiciary Committee’s vote with a procedural vote in the full Senate on Sunday that could bring a final vote on Barrett’s nomination on Monday.
If Barrett is confirmed to the lifetime appointment, the Supreme Court would have a 6-3 conservative majority.
Is that from “The Kingsman?”
“”He cited the Supreme Court vacancy in 2016, when then-President Barack Obama nominated Judge Merrick Garland but Senate Republicans blocked the process while making similar arguments about letting voters decide who should pick the next justice.””
Garland was nothing but political posturing. Obama knew that he was less liberal than what Hillary would put up, and he dangled him in front of the Republicans giving them a choice. A moderate-left judge, or a far left when Hillary was elected.
Completely different atmosphere then as well. It was engraved in stone that she would be the next President after Trump took the nomination, and they had time to sit back and play politics with the nominee. (or so they thought) AND remember, they could have taken the senate as well, setting them up to do exactly what Trump has done with a possible ultra liberal appointee making it through the process, something Obama couldn’t do his last term.
That all went to hell in a handbasket, and now they are considering packing the court to subvert the process even further. When are the states going to finally end all of this and call a convention?? I know the risks, but it’s about time for the final card to be played to rein in feds and their power grabs. Term limits and balanced budget except in times of declared war is all I ask, that is enough to bring the country back around and put it in the people’s hands once again. /rantoff
She's popular and it would swing the suburban women vote to Trump.
Dead Red Ted Kennedy refused to advance several Bush judicial appointees just so he could affect the outcome of some legal decisions
These days I can’t say recalling Romney voting in support of Trump on anything.
I can’t remember the last Republican-appointed Supreme Court justice that the Democrats didn’t throw a tantrum over...
...I also can’t remember the last time Republicans threw a tantrum over a Democrat-appointed justice.
Who?
Three of the Democrats on the Judiciary committee are running for re-election.
Christopher Coons of Delaware
running against is— Republican Lauren Witzke
Fantastic...I think she will be, easily, Trump’s best pick yet for the court.
Agree
You know, Senator Schumer, after you used the extended timetable to smear Brett Michael Kavanaugh with ill-founded calumny, we decided thereafter to accelerate Senate confirmations of nominations to the Supreme Court. And considering that your own fellow Democrats couldn’t bring themselves to oppose Amy Coney Barret, she probably is the best qualified nominee in a long time. But remember what you did to Clarence Thomas, the greatest justice on the court? We won’t let it happen again.
To my mind, the distinguishing difference between the two cases is that in 2016 Obunga was truly a lame duck, on his way out. He could not run again. Whereas, POTUS Trump is NOT on his way out. He is in the last year of his first term. He is running for reelection. One of his campaign promises in 2016 and NOW is to fill every court vacancy with a candidate who adheres to the COTUS and will not legislate from the bench. He is compelled to fill that vacancy forthwith.
I just had to go back and see ACB get questioned by Kamala Harris. Kamala is a classic bitch. I’m not trying be profane. I’m just making an observation. She is an authentic bitch and i feel sorry for whoever has to live with or around her.
Make that 5.4 to 3.6, john roberts is a compromised justice.
Either he has succumbed to the DC set or they have pix of him in a compromising situation.
The only one mentioned by name was DiFi
Garland was not given the chance b/c he’s a politician [not a judge]
why don’t they just say that out loud?
Absolutely correct! Excellent proof of him being a leftist activist demonrat operative “judge” is the recording of the Flynn enbanc hearing which Emmett Sullivan got from the DC Circuit Court. All the Qs and As from all the judges— included incredibly crafted political questioning of Sidney Powell, and the US DOJ atty’s demanding the dismissal of the case.
Garland was disgusting in his tone, and implication and... self importance in the process. Protecting the deep state, and his a@@ buddy Sullivan (so to speak- Sullivan has his own problems in regards to protecting his paedo supposed son- vs. his son’s own daughter, now grown up).
“Democrats on the committee boycotted the vote Thursday...”
Childish fools.
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.