Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sen Reid only did it because Repubs REFUSED to seat any of Obama’s appointments. I remember best the Bork hearings in 1987 that required the 60 votes to approve him. It really forced them to get a consensus candidate, not the narrow-minded radicals that they put in these days with a simple majority. Term limits for the justices might be the answer.
The Republicans weren't being anymore or less difficult than we've seen countless times before. There have been some seriously contentious nominations over the years and what Reid and Obama were running into was pretty mild stuff by comparison. Harry Reid and the Dems honestly believed that they would hold the Presidency and Senate for the next few decades. They believed that the Republicans were going extinct and they'd hold one-party control until something arose to replace them. They really and truly believed that they were just making their lives easier as they moved into this one party utopia. They couldn't have been more wrong of course. They lost the Senate just one year later.
The Democrats have bet and lost several times in a row. Blowing away the 60 vote cloture in favor of the nuclear option was a huge gamble. It has backfired in spectacular fashion. I can understand that it's frustrating lose several times in a row. It doesn't mean the game is over. Just keep playing.
Supreme Court nominees are only confirmed by the senate. The House of Representatives has no say in the matter. There's nothing the house Democrats can do about that or senate rules for that matter.
While the Senate has full control in confirming justices, it does not alone have the authority to increase the size of the court. Approval from the House would also be required.
What if the GOP eliminated the Senate filibuster in advance of the Dem's threats to do so next year, and voted to add additional Supreme Court seats right away, in time to give the GOP-led Senate the ability to fill them before the Nov 3rd election? Trump could go ahead and nominate multiple justices next week.
What's to stop this? When the Dems cry foul, all he has to do is say "gotcha, you hypocrites!"
First, never assume you must get into the mud to defeat a pig. More importantly, Republicans should not resort to leftist Democrats threats or tactics.
What if the GOP eliminated the Senate filibuster in advance of the Dem's threats to do so next year, and voted to add additional Supreme Court seats right away, in time to give the GOP-led Senate the ability to fill them before the Nov 3rd election? Trump could go ahead and nominate multiple justices next week.
What's to stop this? When the Dems cry foul, all he has to do is say "gotcha, you hypocrites!"
What would you want a packed GOP Supreme Court to do? Abolish Social Security and Medicare because they are unconstitutional?
I thought the GOP argument for replacing Ginsburg now was that because the law allows the Republicans to do it since they control the Senate and the Presidency, and that’s what their constituency wants. If that logic is to be accepted, then if the Democrats end up holding the House, Senate and Presidency, and the law allows them to pack the court, isn’t that the Democrats right as well?
This is the path that these partisan exercises in naked power are leading us down, and while I don’t know what the Democrats will end up doing, the party that’s currently in power definitely doesn’t seem to have any interest at all in de-escalation.
everyone seems to be forgetting that the judiciary act of 1869 set the supreme court at eight associate judges and one chief justice, thus it would have to be repealed ane replaced in order for either side to "pack the court". and to tell the truth i think ANY effort to repeal that law will be met with heavy resistance in the senate by the party out of power. so no change of the number of justices on the supreme in the foreseeable future.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
