Breaking: Justice Scalia has died

[Lakhota]

Can President Obama make a recess appointment to replace Scalia?

Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides that:

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.​

Appointment and confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Fang]

Fuck! Now Obama gets to appoint another one! Fuck!

Not so fast. The Republican Senate isn't going to approve of anyone he selects. The new justice will be selected by Hillary/Cruz/Trump/Rubio/Sanders.

 

[mamooth]

You missed the point AGAIN. The stay means that the full court will likely overrule the case.

How have you managed to miss the point that there no longer is a full court? Without Scalia, the 5-4 vote becomes 4-4.

 

[Avatar4321]

Recess appointments only work if the Senate is in recess

 

[jon_berzerk]

Can President Obama make a recess appointment to replace Scalia?

Article II, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution provides that:

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.​

Appointment and confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

like there is going to be a recess between now and next January 21st

--LOL

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Recess appointments only work if the Senate is in recess

Obama already got smacked silly over recess appointments

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

stop the Negro POTUS SCOTUS nominations at all cost...he is too dark..........

 

[pwjohn]

I'm absolutely certain the presidents nominee will make for an excellent addition to the supreme court, bringing both balance and a new, much better way forward.

 

[Jroc]

Maybe they can bring back Sandra Day O'Connor to fill in till the next president is in office

 

[NYcarbineer]

I don't see why you leftists are so upset about Republicans blocking any potential appointments. Why shouldn't we leave it to the next President to decide? Are you that scared of losing?

Why elect Presidents for 4 years if you only want them to be able to do their jobs for 3?

Why do you think you should be able to ignore the will of the Senate?

So you wish to pretend that if the Senate blocks a vote until next January, and then Hillary Clinton nominates the same person, the Senate should confirm him/her?

 

[ogibillm]

You missed the point AGAIN. The stay means that the full court will likely overrule the case.

How have you managed to miss the point that there no longer is a full court? Without Scalia, the 5-4 vote becomes 4-4.

that's exactly it about scalia, isn't it? there was never any doubt about how he was going to vote. stated even more simply, that means that no matter who does the nominating and when they are approved it's highly unlikely that republicans will get such a partisan vote for the next 30 years

 

[candycorn]

Quite obviously, there is a political reality to the death of Justice Scalia.

The court is split 4-4 between those appointed by Republican Presidents and those appointed by Democratic Presidents. If party lines are not crossed, there will be a lot of lower court decisions that remain since a 4-4 decisions by the Supreme Court let the lower court rulings stand. I believe that the new formation of the court in the next session can decide to re-hear the cases once the bench is filled. So we may just be hitting the pause button on a lot of cases.

The intersection of our presidential politics and the constitutional duties of the President have, perhaps, never been more interesting. Can you imagine it? The Senate's Majority Leader has said that there will be no hearings this year. This is pretty absurd but whatever...most people do not know enough about the workings of the SCOTUS to weigh in responsibly and whether we need 9 justices or not. As stated...it will amount to hitting the "pause button" on a lot of cases. Anyway...the people do not want to hear about what they don't know; to most Americans, you don't wait a year to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court...its dumb.

So lets say that the Senate gives in to what is sure to be the overwhelming public opinion and has hearings. Obama nominates a....well, does it matter? Reflexively, the GOP congress will hate them. Eventually, whoever the eventual nominee that makes it out of committee makes it to the floor and the Senate is set to approve the nominee...It's mid May or June.

Meanwhile the California Primary and it's hundreds of delegates are up for grabs. Cruz is still in it but he has to do this filibuster. The entire Senate despises this dude so they are happy to schedule the vote on the day of the primary so he has to be in Washington talking about non-sense.

Meanwhile the Senate has 24 GOP seats up for grabs. The Dems need to take 4 to re-take the Senate. Its almost a given that they will.
It may be wise to negotiate with Obama over a nominee rather than have zero input next year with Hillary picking the nominee with a Democratic controlled Senate.

 

[Toro]

stop the Negro POTUS SCOTUS nominations at all cost...he is too dark..........

But he still gets to.

Isn't that awesome?

I can't wait until the entire SCOTUS is comprised of black people!

 

[idb]

Not anywhere in fact.

U.S. Senate sets its own rules. There is precedent that Reid single handedly changed the rules for his partisan reasons...

Maybe, but that will have to be voted on anew won't it?
The current state of affairs is that the filibusters are eliminated for nominations below SCOTUS.
The previous 'nuclear option' hasn't changed the rules as far as appointing a replacement for Scalia.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Quite obviously, there is a political reality to the death of Justice Scalia.

The court is split 4-4 between those appointed by Republican Presidents and those appointed by Democratic Presidents. If party lines are not crossed, there will be a lot of lower court decisions that remain since a 4-4 decisions by the Supreme Court let the lower court rulings stand. I believe that the new formation of the court in the next session can decide to re-hear the cases once the bench is filled. So we may just be hitting the pause button on a lot of cases.

The intersection of our presidential politics and the constitutional duties of the President have, perhaps, never been more interesting. Can you imagine it? The Senate's Majority Leader has said that there will be no hearings this year. This is pretty absurd but whatever...most people do not know enough about the workings of the SCOTUS to weigh in responsibly and whether we need 9 justices or not. As stated...it will amount to hitting the "pause button" on a lot of cases. Anyway...the people do not want to hear about what they don't know; to most Americans, you don't wait a year to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court...its dumb.

So lets say that the Senate gives in to what is sure to be the overwhelming public opinion and has hearings. Obama nominates a....well, does it matter? Reflexively, the GOP congress will hate them. Eventually, whoever the eventual nominee that makes it out of committee makes it to the floor and the Senate is set to approve the nominee...It's mid May or June.

Meanwhile the California Primary and it's hundreds of delegates are up for grabs. Cruz is still in it but he has to do this filibuster. The entire Senate despises this dude so they are happy to schedule the vote on the day of the primary so he has to be in Washington talking about non-sense.

Meanwhile the Senate has 24 GOP seats up for grabs. The Dems need to take 4 to re-take the Senate. Its almost a given that they will.
It may be wise to negotiate with Obama over a nominee rather than have zero input next year with Hillary picking the nominee with a Democratic controlled Senate.

maybe

the latest lower court decision

wiped the administrations new epa plan

--LOL

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

Making Nominations to the Supreme Court is for white Presidents only....Obama to Back of the Bus

 

[deltex1]

Obama is golfing in California. He will be told soon of the passing. Or maybe see it on CNN in the morning.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

You missed the point AGAIN. The stay means that the full court will likely overrule the case.

How have you managed to miss the point that there no longer is a full court? Without Scalia, the 5-4 vote becomes 4-4.

The lower court refused to issue a stay. The Supreme Court issued the stay.

Anyway, those rules will go bye-bye when a Republican takes office.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

I predict a shit storm of epic proportions in the US Senate over the next six months with the Republicans holding up any nomination until next year. Stay tuned!

They have to hold out 300 days plus....

Yup, but it only take one Senator to put a hold on a vote for a qualified nominee. I can't recall if the Senate rules still disallow holds on nominees for SCOTUS or if McConnell got that changed a while back after the rules kerfuffle when Reid held the gavel.

and then a lot more liberals vote come november and guarantee a democrat is elected.

so there ya go.

Could well be the case as well as with the hard core neoconservatives and their fellow travelers. I know many of the East & West coast snowbirds will be voting absentee at home then again with their absentee ballots in places like Florida and Arizona. I have two snowbird set of neighbors here in AZ, one from Montana and another from Wisconsin that have boasted doing just that, the creatures!

 

[Vigilante]

Any bets on how long before this POS changes his mind and give the Manchurian muslim his way ...AGAIN?