Posted on 11/04/2006 5:00:12 PM PST by Clintonfatigued
For weeks, commentators have speculated that significant numbers of conservatives, alienated by over-spending, the Iraq War, and other perceived GOP disappointments, will stay home on Election Day, giving one or both Houses of Congress to Democrats. But for those who care about reforming the Supreme Court, sitting this one out may soon look like a mistake of historic proportions.
For the past several weeks, there has been a rumor circulating among high-level officials in Washington, D.C., that a member of the U.S. Supreme Court has received grave medical news and will announce his or her retirement by years end. While such rumors are not unusual in the nations capital, this one comes from credible sources. Additionally, a less credible but still noteworthy post last week at the liberal Democratic Underground blog says, Send your good vibes to Justice Stevens. I just got off the phone with a friend of his family and right now he is very ill and at 86 years old that is not good.
Normally, this news might be too ghoulish to repeat publicly. Nevertheless, with the election just days away, it is news that should be considered. It points out what could be a once-in-a-lifetime chance for the 20-year movement to recast the court with a constitutionalist majority. It would be a cruel twist indeed for conservatives to teach Republicans a lesson next Tuesday, only to be taught a lesson themselves within months when new Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D.-Vt.) leads a Democratic majority against the most important Supreme Court nominee in decades. Conservatives whose mantra is no more Souters should bear in mind Robert Borks fate after the Senate changed from Republican to Democratic hands in 1986.
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
I never thought I would say this but, "Go Lincoln Chaffee Go! We need to support Chaffee"
Expect the Rats(or Stevens himself) to release this info on Monday (after the Saddam verdict) to get their vote out.
I should of read further. Take a look at my Post #57. I'm just curious how long that can go on, under the Constitution. Blackbird.
You're very welcome. And about that other thing, no two people agree on everything.
If that's the case, W may nominate Consuelo Maria Callahan or Maureen Mahoney.
Right.
Obstructing an appointment going into the 2008 elections would be suicide for the Democrats.
It won't happen.
If Stevens retires or otherwise is gone, a Bush appointee, one way or another, will join the Court.
Good point.
Stevens smells blood of the Republicans now.
His handlers must have convinced him that he can finally fall on his pen after doing enough damage to the country for one man in one lifetime.
Makes sense, if the Party in control of the Congress has a mind to react the way you state, but IF it is controlled by the RAT's, then what's next. You state that the seat can stay vacant forever, that's the part I'm not so sure of. I've got a sense that you're right to some degree, just want to see it in black and white. I'm looking, but this could take a while for my self satisfaction. Thanks. Blackbird.
I think he didn't say it completely. My take is that he wants the situation to be like when he was appointed: a Republican President and a Democrat-controlled Senate.
I'm very glad to hear that because I have tremendous respect for Santorum.
What if the democrats take control of the senate (god forbid) and both Stephens and Ginsburg resign in the near future leaving the court with 4 Conservatives 1 Moderate and 2 Liberals. Conservatives hold Bush's feet to the fire and he nominates two true conservatives. The new democrat senate then blocks the nominations in committee, says nomination's are dead on arrival etc. Bush responds by telling Democrat's basically "Screw you, these are my nominees, I'm not withdrawing them, either bring them up for a vote or the positions can remain vacant, and if you vote them down I'll renominate them or someone even more conservative."
My question is would this be plausible? Would a seven member supreme court have all the power as the full nine member court? Is there any time limit on when supreme court vacancies HAVE to be filled or could they remain vacant until Bush leaves office in 2009?
Then tell your liberal artist friend you will be praying for her to learn tolerance.
That she make her head explode.
I'm only visiting my sister in FL right now, so I can't vote here, but my sister did vote for Katherine Harris.:)
Would a seven member supreme court have all the power as the full nine member court?
Yes.
Is there any time limit on when supreme court vacancies HAVE to be filled or could they remain vacant until Bush leaves office in 2009?
They can remain vacant as long as Congress and the President fail to agree on filling those vacancies. There are no tinme limits.
should make her head explode.
Okay, better yet. Use the prayer for tolerance line but say you started to but realized your prayers were not helping and now you put her in a prayer group.
:)
My question is would this be plausible? Would a seven member supreme court have all the power as the full nine member court? Is there any time limit on when supreme court vacancies HAVE to be filled or could they remain vacant until Bush leaves office in 2009?
I guarantee you if Stevens retires, even if the Democrats take the Senate, they will NOT go into the 2008 elections obstructing a Bush appointment.
That would be political suicide.
Think about it.
Section. 2.
Clause 2: He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
Clause 3: The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.
.......
NOTES:
There are no time requirements or limits. He can nominate a person then confirmation thereafter can take years, if necessary. Eight members or less can make decisions. There is no one above the Court to say otherwise.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1732428/posts
ONLY YOU CAN ENSURE THAT THE TERRORISTS DO NOT CLAIM VICTORY WITH A DEMOCRAT CONTROLLED CONGRESS!!
CLICK THE IMAGE ABOVE, OR CLICK HERE AND SPEND 15 TO 30 MINUTES MAKING A FEW PHONE CALLS! THAT'S ALL IT TAKES AND YOU CAN MAKE A HUGE DIFFERENCE!
STOP THE ISLAMIC TERRORISTS FROM CLAIMING VICTORY, AND STOP THE JUDICIAL TERRORISTS FROM CLAIMING VICTORY!! THE FUTURE OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!
Prayer actually offends these people. I was told this by a liberal artist I know -- that she and her friends are OFFENDED when prayer is mentioned.
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.