|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi: |
02-15-2016, 10:10 AM
|
#1
|
Certifiable Intertidal Anguiologist
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Somewhere between OOB & west of Watch Hill
Posts: 35,272
|
I don't see what is different this time than previous ones - both sides have attempted and often been successful in stonewalling or preventing a nomination for a justice.
Situation normal, all depends on whose ox to gore.
|
~Fix the Bait~ ~Pogies Forever~
Striped Bass Fishing - All Stripers
Kobayashi Maru Election - there is no way to win.
Apocalypse is Coming:
|
|
|
02-15-2016, 10:13 AM
|
#2
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR
I don't see what is different this time than previous ones - both sides have attempted and often been successful in stonewalling or preventing a nomination for a justice.
Situation normal, all depends on whose ox to gore.
|
The difference is, when Bush was in office, dissent was "the highest form of patriotism". Now that Obama is in there, dissent is the lowest form of racism.
Of course, you are correct.
|
|
|
|
02-15-2016, 11:39 AM
|
#3
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,408
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT
The difference is, when Bush was in office, dissent was "the highest form of patriotism". Now that Obama is in there, dissent is the lowest form of racism.
Of course, you are correct.
|
No, it isn't racisim, but it is partisanship at its worst on both sides. For every Schumer quote, there are quotes of McConnell et al., during the Bust administration backing the president's right to nominate justices.
Detbusch as the constitutional expert here, I'll ask you, and I'll admit I am ignorant. Is there any so-called 'nuclear' recess type options for justices like there are for other appointments?
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
02-15-2016, 12:24 PM
|
#4
|
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,725
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND
Is there any so-called 'nuclear' recess type options for justices like there are for other appointments?
|
The last paragraph of Article II section 2, which contains the appointments clause, states "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."
So, yes, Obama can make a recess appointment to the SC. And that has been done before. But the Senate can vacate that appointment after their next session, which has also been done before. So it would only be temporary, unless approved by the Senate. Obama has an opening now to do that since the Senate is in recess. But he says he won't. And if he doesn't do it now, he probably won't be able to do it afterwards since the Senate would stay in session, either in fact or pro forma, to avoid that.
One of the more unusual anomalies on the matter of recess appointments to the Supreme Court, if the Senate vacates them, is that SCOTUS Judges are supposed to be appointed for life. But that only applies if the Senate confirms them. Which is another indicator of the power and necessity of Senate confirmation and of the limited power of the President to appoint.
|
|
|
|
02-15-2016, 12:55 PM
|
#5
|
Also known as OAK
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Westlery, RI
Posts: 10,408
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by detbuch
The last paragraph of Article II section 2, which contains the appointments clause, states "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."
So, yes, Obama can make a recess appointment to the SC. And that has been done before. But the Senate can vacate that appointment after their next session, which has also been done before. So it would only be temporary, unless approved by the Senate. Obama has an opening now to do that since the Senate is in recess. But he says he won't. And if he doesn't do it now, he probably won't be able to do it afterwards since the Senate would stay in session, either in fact or pro forma, to avoid that.
One of the more unusual anomalies on the matter of recess appointments to the Supreme Court, if the Senate vacates them, is that SCOTUS Judges are supposed to be appointed for life. But that only applies if the Senate confirms them. Which is another indicator of the power and necessity of Senate confirmation and of the limited power of the President to appoint.
|
Thanks for the lesson.
If Obama nomiates a so-called moderate, the Senate will be playing a tough hand; delay delay delay, and hope the GOP candidate wins, of they will have to obstruct nominees for 4 more years
|
Bryan
Originally Posted by #^^^^^^^^^^^&
"For once I agree with Spence. UGH. I just hope I don't get the urge to go start buying armani suits to wear in my shop"
|
|
|
02-15-2016, 10:44 AM
|
#6
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnR
I don't see what is different this time than previous ones - both sides have attempted and often been successful in stonewalling or preventing a nomination for a justice.
Situation normal, all depends on whose ox to gore.
|
exactly 
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:53 PM.
|
| |