GOP plans to block any Biden Supreme Court pick (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 01, 2024, 02:46:36 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)
  GOP plans to block any Biden Supreme Court pick (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: GOP plans to block any Biden Supreme Court pick  (Read 1908 times)
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,614


« on: December 20, 2021, 10:17:18 AM »

Nah its worth the risk waiting for another term till June. Having an old judge with likely good connections to the rest of the bench can possibly help moderate any upcoming opinions for a very important term.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,614


« Reply #1 on: December 20, 2021, 08:38:56 PM »

Basically the nominee I can see Biden nominating that an R senate would confirm would be
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnnie_B._Rawlinson
She seems to be a relative moderate and lets biden keep his black women promise. She is also relatively older.

However Breyer will likely retire next year anyway.
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,614


« Reply #2 on: December 20, 2021, 11:33:49 PM »
« Edited: December 21, 2021, 12:33:48 AM by lfromnj »

Reminder that Democrats have never denied a Republican POTUS the opportunity to nominate a SCOTUS justice, while Republicans are poised to have done that to Democrats twice.

(No, turning down Bork's nomination is not equivalent. Reagan nominated Kennedy after that and the Senate confirmed him. That's why it's called "advise and consent." You don't automatically get your first choice, particularly one with as many ethical issues as Bork had.)

Maybe they didn't block but they certainly would before the GOP did it in 2016

https://www.politico.com/story/2007/07/schumer-to-fight-new-bush-high-court-picks-005146


Quote
New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”
Logged
lfromnj
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,614


« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2021, 12:52:11 AM »

The thing is, all supreme court members have to essentially buy into the delusion that they are apolitical public servants, even though reality clearly shows SCOTUS is little more than an indirectly elected legislature with lifelong appointments. Bryer almost certainly believes by being "above" making plans for his succession, because jr genuinely believes the hype of the Court.

Tbh the best thing to do would be a complete overhaul of how the Court is structured. Make it like selected like the Swiss Federal Council and have its members directly chosen by legislature to ensure ratios of conservative to liberal are roughly matched. Would make a mockery of its supposed independence from the legislature, but such qualms have long since been trampled, better codify it rather than this bizarre worst of all worlds status quo.

I've seen multiple posters in the past suggest that a good way to reform the Court and in particular do away with judges strategically retiring in order to choose their successor would be to make it so that every President appoints two judges to the Court (with a two-term President filling two seats per term). The two most senior Justices would be volunteered for retirement and replaced by the two new appointments. I like the idea of each presidential election inherently having the power to fill two SCOTUS seats baked in. Turnout, for one thing, would in all likelihood be perpetually higher than it is now. I think it would be far superior to the system we have now, where republican Justices conspire with republican politicians to keep the Court conservative no matter how many presidential elections democrats win in a row with a majority of the vote. The downside to this system would be that republicans would still be over represented in the EC and in the Senate without reforming those as well, so a President could still appoint Justices while losing the vote - like trump did - and a republican controlled Senate that won tens of millions of votes less could still confirm them. For this system to be a great reform we would also have to do away with the EC and add DC add Puerto Rico as states/OR do away with the Senate having the power to confirm or deny altogether.

Rehnquist died on the court, Sandra Day O Connor retired due to her husband, Scalia died on the court. Only Kennedy chose to retire in relatively normal circumstances but he is literally 83.
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 0.024 seconds with 10 queries.