What happens to republican senators that vote for an Obama supreme nomination?

[Kibby]

Originally Posted by JAMS14

That's what Senators like Mark Kirk are afraid of.

Why should he be worried? He is not on the Judicial Committee and it's that Committee that will vote.

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by LoveToRow

Your chronology doesn't account for the Republican filibuster of Holder, unless you are silly enough to believe that the Democrats will have over 60 Senate seats after this year's election.

All the Dems have to do is change the rules and hold a vote, like they did with other appointments the Republicans were sitting on. There is nothing in the Constitution about a super majority.

[bluesjuke]

Originally Posted by GregW

We will elect Senator Sanders as president and back him up with a Democratic majority in the Senate. In the meantime the Senate will find enough Republicans to support President Obama's nominee to SCOTUS that an moderate Judge will be approved. After Sanders is elected and the Senate has a Democratic majority several of the elderly Judges will retire and a truly Liberal court of younger judges will result. That will protect the country from the pernicious attempts by the Republicans to try to return this country to a time that never was and never should have been.

Stand strong Comrade!

[Goodnight]

Originally Posted by GuyNTexas

I don't think one needs to be Karnak the Magnificent to predict the pedigree of Obama's next choice.

Look, both sides pick based on political ideology ... that is no secret.

In a perfect world politics would play no role in such appointments, however, that is impossible when leftists Democrats insist on selecting liberal ideologues who have no reservation about ignoring the intent of the framers ... but rule instead based on their ideological positions, Constitution be damned.

Progressive liberal policies too often directly conflict with the Constitution, so sadly, they WILL NOT CHOOSE a constructionist, even though that IS THE PRIMARY DUTY of a Supreme Court Justice ... to rule on Constitutional law, as intended by the framers.

Liberals simply ignore intent, and go into incoherent explanations as to why such things as outright gun bans don't actually ,"infringe" on the right to bear. Of course, such garbage is nonsensical and absurd. But that's the way they roll.

It is quite the irony for liberals to shout about Republicans refusing to approve Liberal Justices who will absolutely violate their sworn oath to defend the Constitution, as they look for any avenue to bypass or sidestep it.

I don't see him going far left on this appointment one bit, that would give them exactly the reason they needed to reject and delay. He is going to pick a moderate that most likely that was unanimously approved in a prior appointment, if that happens they will have no reason for rejection.


Look down the possible list of around 10 judges that are held in high regard, it will be tough to find a reason.


Look at Padmanabhan Srikanth "Sri" Srinivasan for instance, approved to the DC District Court 97-0, you think they are going to go against those numbers? Going to be one hell of a name tag.