Sri Srinivasan and Two Other Judges Being Vetted for Scalia's Seat (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
May 19, 2024, 12:00:57 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Sri Srinivasan and Two Other Judges Being Vetted for Scalia's Seat (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Sri Srinivasan and Two Other Judges Being Vetted for Scalia's Seat  (Read 1413 times)
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

« on: March 05, 2016, 02:52:19 PM »

Guess that means we'll stay at 4-4. What a shame.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2016, 03:41:29 AM »

Republicans will be hurt more politically by rejecting a moderate nominee they already voted to confirm once before nearly unanimously, than by rejecting a more liberal nominee.  

That I believe is President Obama's thinking.  

Right. Yeah, I only meant that after we clean up in November (I know I'm being a bit overconfident here Tongue), we fill every new open seat that comes up with ultra-liberal justices with absolutely zero consideration given to Republicans. Nuke the 60-vote cloture requirement and ignore their complaints. Stack the appellate and district courts with very young, qualified liberals as well. Another 4 - 8 years of a Democratic WH and the entire federal judiciary will be a conservative's worst nightmare come true.

As I understand it, that judge, Jane something from Iowa, is being seemingly strategically considered to both put pressure on Republicans/Grassley, but also to hurt him in Iowa for a potential challenge to his seat this November.

At any rate, I trust Obama to make the right decisions in this case. I know he will want to inflict maximum pain on them as much as anyone else for probably both personal reasons and to increase our chances in November.

Yup. Then next time the Pubs have control of everything they split the 9th Circuit in 2 and double the number of judges in each district and appellate court, maybe tack on another 2 judges on SCOTUS. We should be minimizing the amount of politics in the courts. Bad precedent is bad precedent for everyone.   
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,838
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2016, 04:00:18 AM »

... or D.C. vs. Heller (the idea that the man who wrote that opinion spent his life claiming to be a champion original intent is insane).

Lol. Because individuals totally didn't own weapons until 2008. The fact that there were 4 dissenters in Heller is disgraceful. Between Anglo-Saxon/post-1066 English custom, the English Bill of Rights, Blackstone, the various colonial ordinances of secession from England, the various Bills of Rights of State Constitutions drafted contemporaneous with the U.S. Constitution, debates from the first Congress, St. George Tucker, Joseph Story, and centuries of common understanding, the notion that the Heller decision acknowledging that "the people" means the people is inconsistent with original intent, is a joke.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 9 queries.