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.
Donald Trump arguably levied war against the United States when he set off then supported a violent assault on the people’s representatives. He clearly comes far closer to the definition of treason than Roberts.
surely you favored the approval of all 3 "Trump judges".
I believe that a judicial or cabinet nominee should always be approved, as long as that person is 1) qualified, and 2) has no legal or moral disqualifications. I think the Constitutional power of the Senate to "advise and consent" was meant to prevent appointments of people that clearly shouldn't be there, not to inject partisan politics into the process. Obviously that intent has been lost long ago.
So even though I am a Democrat, I would have approved Barrett and Gorsuch. The Kavanaugh case was a difficult one. I don't find him trustworthy and I suspect that he was guilty of sexual assault. But since there was no proof, one has to suspend one's own suspicions and presume him to be innocent. And he is certainly qualified.
I imagine if the Democrats ever got an open slot, in today's extremism they would nominate the equivalent of a descendant of Mao Zedong
My point is that the last time Democrats nominated a Supreme Court Justice, it was Merrick Garland, widely considered a moderate, certainly no equivalent of Mao. So if Democrats ever get an open slot, I would expect to see someone like Garland nominated.
Why do you think I don't read threads beyond my input?
"Another unlikely possibility is that Trump’s Vice President Mike Pence, in his role as Senate president, could try to throw out a state’s disputed electoral votes entirely if the two chambers cannot agree, according to Foley’s analysis.
In that case, the Electoral College Act does not make clear whether a candidate would still need 270 votes, a majority of the total, or could prevail with a majority of the remaining electoral votes - for example, 260 of the 518 votes that would be left if Pennsylvania’s electors were invalidated.
“It is fair to say that none of these laws has been stress-tested before,” Benjamin Ginsberg, a lawyer who represented the Bush campaign during the 2000 dispute, told reporters in a conference call on Oct. 20.
The parties could ask the Supreme Court to resolve any congressional stalemate, but it’s not certain the court would be willing to adjudicate how Congress should count electoral votes."
see the bolded, from your own quoted material.
"If the 2 chambers cannot agree". What would the vote in Congress have to be to not pass? Simple majority? 2/3? Was there any indication there were enough House members for it NOT to pass the House? What about the Senate?
Look, it's known - though of course not publicized by the MSM, that the Dems challenged states in the past. That's the legal opportunity they have, and what some Republicans did.
Conservatives rule on the merits of the law and may interpret the law differently from other conservatives.
Leftist judges rule too often based on their feelings rather than the actual text of the law being adjudicated. Since they share a world view, they often band together.
So Leftist judges make leftist rulings while conservative justices actually rule based on their reading of the text of the law, and often differ. Par for the course.
If conservative judges were activists like Lefitst judges, they would all vote the same.
Didn't Mitch already say no Justices will be appointed until after 2024?
He didn't say that. He said no Justices during 2024.
If Thomas falls dead tonight, then McConnell would consider Biden's replacement. So any seats to fill during 2021, 2022, and 2023 would be filled. Only 2024 would be blocked.
Besides that, McConnell was speculating if the GOP resumed Senate control. Currently, the Democrats control the Senate, so McConnell has no power to block SCOTUS appointments unless the GOP takes control of the Senate after the November 2022 election. McConnell has no power to thwart SCOTUS nominees until 2023 at the earliest.
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.
