Breaking: Justice Scalia has died

[BlueGin]

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.

Or... even worse for the GOP, Bernie could win. That's a serious gamble on their part.

If Obama nominates a moderate Hispanic, the GOP will be against a wall. Their true "right wing loser" colors will come out.

Obama won't nominate a moderate anything

There are no moderate democrats

 

[Vigilante]

Just a reminder the Cloture rules requiring 60 votes to end debate in the Senate still applies for SCOTUS nominees. Yes Harry Reid dropped the nuke for executive appointments but exempted SCOTUS nominees. If 40 GOPers stand strong the nightmare of Obama getting to replace Scalia shall not pass.

Of course after the election the Democrats will have more than 40 votes and so can block ANY nominee if a Republican't is elected.

A bitch how the Constitution is written to force compromise eh.

They have more than 40 votes NOW! Hate to burst you bubble.... idiot!

 

[eddiew]

obama can choose liberal or not ?

He will choose a liberal, it remains to be seen if he can get them confirmed.

Naahhh, he will appoint a Kenyan conservative. Then everyone will be happy!

What if it's 4-4, will all obamas bills move forward with no republican majority

What Happens in a Supreme Court Tie?

Although rare, 4-4 ties are hardly unheard-of—justices do recuse themselves from time to time. A split decision effectively upholds the ruling of the lower court (presumably a state supreme court). In the event of such a tie, the court typically issues what's known as a per curiam decision. The opinion in such a decision is issued under the court's name, as opposed to consisting of a majority and a minority opinion. Justices, however, may attach dissenting opinions to the per curiam decision if they like—as happened in Bush v. Gore.

When a 4-4 deadlock does occur, the case is not deemed to have set any sort of precedent. Tradition holds that the court's per curiam opinion in such ties is usually very, very terse, often consisting of no more than a single sentence: "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided court." But it's a safe bet that the opinion in Kerry v. Bush or Bush v. Kerry would be a lot longer than usual.

Roberts is a Prog stooge. There will be no ties......that is....if he does not want to wind up like Scalia.

and the best that you can hope for is to die in your sleep

 

[Flopper]

Just a reminder the Cloture rules requiring 60 votes to end debate in the Senate still applies for SCOTUS nominees. Yes Harry Reid dropped the nuke for executive appointments but exempted SCOTUS nominees. If 40 GOPers stand strong the nightmare of Obama getting to replace Scalia shall not pass.

What makes you think it will come to a vote. It's got to get out of the judicial committee first and get scheduled before the Senate.

 

[Votto]

Perhaps Obama should nominate Ron Reagan Jr.

Make the Republicans go on record rejecting a Reagan.

The GOP should scream, "No!" before Obama has the chance to open his pie hole.......and then cave like they always do.

 

[BlueGin]

This certainly brightened up my otherwise cold, dull day!

That's not a nice thing to say!

For the amount of damage that guy did....I do not feel one ounce of guilt.

Can't help but smile about this news

I'm sure your mother is proud of what a classy, compassionate, decent human being she raised.

He (and his kind) is a good argument FOR abortion

 

[Votto]

Just a reminder the Cloture rules requiring 60 votes to end debate in the Senate still applies for SCOTUS nominees. Yes Harry Reid dropped the nuke for executive appointments but exempted SCOTUS nominees. If 40 GOPers stand strong the nightmare of Obama getting to replace Scalia shall not pass.

What makes you think it will come to a vote. It's got to get out of the judicial committee first and get scheduled before the Senate.

I say Obama should write an Executive Order to put his stooge in. It's not like he can deal with Congress.

Having appointed the next stooge, it's not like they will find it unconstitutional.

 

[Vigilante]

Just a reminder the Cloture rules requiring 60 votes to end debate in the Senate still applies for SCOTUS nominees. Yes Harry Reid dropped the nuke for executive appointments but exempted SCOTUS nominees. If 40 GOPers stand strong the nightmare of Obama getting to replace Scalia shall not pass.

What makes you think it will come to a vote. It's got to get out of the judicial committee first and get scheduled before the Senate.

I said it was a reminder...nothing else...do you always PROJECT?

 

[BlueGin]

The left dances on his grave.....

Hour 1: Liberals Respond to Antonin Scalia's Death with Hatred, Mockery, Joy - Breitbart

Not surprised. Liberals are scumbags.

who's the scumbag ? libs or the republican pos that got 1000's killed in his bs war??

You are

 

[BreezeWood]

Just a reminder the Cloture rules requiring 60 votes to end debate in the Senate still applies for SCOTUS nominees. Yes Harry Reid dropped the nuke for executive appointments but exempted SCOTUS nominees. If 40 GOPers stand strong the nightmare of Obama getting to replace Scalia shall not pass.

.
in that case you will be needing the same 40 to block Hilary from that same choice, that is if there are still 40 republicans in the Senate after November ...

.

 

[Rustic]

Perhaps Obama should nominate Ron Reagan Jr.

Make the Republicans go on record rejecting a Reagan.

The GOP should scream, "No!" before Obama has the chance to open his pie hole.......and then cave like they always do.

Ron JR is a POS...

 

[Rustic]

Just a reminder the Cloture rules requiring 60 votes to end debate in the Senate still applies for SCOTUS nominees. Yes Harry Reid dropped the nuke for executive appointments but exempted SCOTUS nominees. If 40 GOPers stand strong the nightmare of Obama getting to replace Scalia shall not pass.

.
in that case you will be needing the same 40 to block Hilary from that same choice, that is if there are still 40 republicans in the Senate after November ...

.

The economy is shit, I suspect there will be more tea party types in congress...

 

[Votto]

Should Progs mark this day as a new National holiday?

 

[BreezeWood]

.
like Humpty Dumpty there is nothing the republicans can do to put back what they just lost and not letting the otherside take a vote will only make it worse for them.

sore loser pubs.

.

 

[sealybobo]

Senior U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia found dead at West Texas ranch

have no details. But this is huge.

Good riddance

 

[Flopper]

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.

Or... even worse for the GOP, Bernie could win. That's a serious gamble on their part.

If Obama nominates a moderate Hispanic, the GOP will be against a wall. Their true "right wing loser" colors will come out.

Somehow, I think sticking it to this President will override that concern. Who knows, maybe they know they already look like dirt to that demographic and will jsut say, "fuck it".

The political reality of Justice Scalia's death is likely the greatest blow to the Conservative Movement since Stonewall Jackson being killed by his own men. R.E. Lee was reported to have said that he had just lost "his right arm". The conservative anchor of the high court has passed. And us liberals have a golden opportunity to sieze the court for the next generation (or 2) if we don't screw up and nominate Bernie Sanders who simply cannot win in the General Election unless there is a MAJOR gaffe by his Republican Opponent. And by MAJOR gaffe, I'm saying something along the lines of using a racial slur or flashing a Crips or Bloods gang sign at a rally....

Its time for the Democrats to get serious about the election and install Secretary Clinton as their standard bearer. She is not only the best qualified person on either side in this election, she is the best qualified to take on the GOP. Obama's first year to eighteen months was almost criminally naive in terms of what he expected from Congress. Ms. Clinton will have no such illusions about the opposition. For them, it's party over people, principles that are for sale to the highest bidder, and a morally bankrupt constituency that seems to think a realty TV star is our best bet going forward.

These are the stakes; not only for the time and place but for the nation. I mean, who is he going to nominate for the High Court? Judge Judy...based on the fact that more people listen to her decisions than any other judge?


As we discuss the political reality, we should keep in mind that Justice Scalia had a large family and was admired (if not agreed with) by his contemporaries. He was a remarkable public servant who deserves our thanks for his service. We need more people like him--who will put up with the slings and arrows for 30 years in the public limelight when he could be making millions upon millions in private practice.

I agree with most of your statements however, I think we should be looking for really fair impartial judges. With the exception of political junkies, I think this is really what most Americans want. In so many countries, judges are bought and paid for before they ever sit on the bench. They serve their masters, not the people.

Whether we're conservative or liberal, we need to be looking for judges that know the law, the constitution, and can put their personal and political beliefs aside and judge cases based on their merit. Unfortunately in Washington, a good judge is one that will rule in favor of issues you support regardless of the law or case.

 

[Votto]

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.

Or... even worse for the GOP, Bernie could win. That's a serious gamble on their part.

If Obama nominates a moderate Hispanic, the GOP will be against a wall. Their true "right wing loser" colors will come out.

Somehow, I think sticking it to this President will override that concern. Who knows, maybe they know they already look like dirt to that demographic and will jsut say, "fuck it".

The political reality of Justice Scalia's death is likely the greatest blow to the Conservative Movement since Stonewall Jackson being killed by his own men. R.E. Lee was reported to have said that he had just lost "his right arm". The conservative anchor of the high court has passed. And us liberals have a golden opportunity to sieze the court for the next generation (or 2) if we don't screw up and nominate Bernie Sanders who simply cannot win in the General Election unless there is a MAJOR gaffe by his Republican Opponent. And by MAJOR gaffe, I'm saying something along the lines of using a racial slur or flashing a Crips or Bloods gang sign at a rally....

Its time for the Democrats to get serious about the election and install Secretary Clinton as their standard bearer. She is not only the best qualified person on either side in this election, she is the best qualified to take on the GOP. Obama's first year to eighteen months was almost criminally naive in terms of what he expected from Congress. Ms. Clinton will have no such illusions about the opposition. For them, it's party over people, principles that are for sale to the highest bidder, and a morally bankrupt constituency that seems to think a realty TV star is our best bet going forward.

These are the stakes; not only for the time and place but for the nation. I mean, who is he going to nominate for the High Court? Judge Judy...based on the fact that more people listen to her decisions than any other judge?


As we discuss the political reality, we should keep in mind that Justice Scalia had a large family and was admired (if not agreed with) by his contemporaries. He was a remarkable public servant who deserves our thanks for his service. We need more people like him--who will put up with the slings and arrows for 30 years in the public limelight when he could be making millions upon millions in private practice.

I agree with most of your statements however, I think we should be looking for really fair impartial judges. With the exception of political junkies, I think this is really what most Americans want. In so many countries, judges are bought and paid for before they ever sit on the bench. They serve their masters, not the people.

Whether we're conservative or liberal, we need to be looking for judges that know the law, the constitution, and can put their personal and political beliefs aside and judge cases based on their merit. Unfortunately in Washington, a good judge is one that will rule in favor of issues you support regardless of the law or case.

Well if you want an unbias modeate fair judge, then look no further

Mr. Department of Justice himself is at your service.

 

[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.

Or... even worse for the GOP, Bernie could win. That's a serious gamble on their part.

If Obama nominates a moderate Hispanic, the GOP will be against a wall. Their true "right wing loser" colors will come out.

Somehow, I think sticking it to this President will override that concern. Who knows, maybe they know they already look like dirt to that demographic and will jsut say, "fuck it".

The political reality of Justice Scalia's death is likely the greatest blow to the Conservative Movement since Stonewall Jackson being killed by his own men. R.E. Lee was reported to have said that he had just lost "his right arm". The conservative anchor of the high court has passed. And us liberals have a golden opportunity to sieze the court for the next generation (or 2) if we don't screw up and nominate Bernie Sanders who simply cannot win in the General Election unless there is a MAJOR gaffe by his Republican Opponent. And by MAJOR gaffe, I'm saying something along the lines of using a racial slur or flashing a Crips or Bloods gang sign at a rally....

Its time for the Democrats to get serious about the election and install Secretary Clinton as their standard bearer. She is not only the best qualified person on either side in this election, she is the best qualified to take on the GOP. Obama's first year to eighteen months was almost criminally naive in terms of what he expected from Congress. Ms. Clinton will have no such illusions about the opposition. For them, it's party over people, principles that are for sale to the highest bidder, and a morally bankrupt constituency that seems to think a realty TV star is our best bet going forward.

These are the stakes; not only for the time and place but for the nation. I mean, who is he going to nominate for the High Court? Judge Judy...based on the fact that more people listen to her decisions than any other judge?


As we discuss the political reality, we should keep in mind that Justice Scalia had a large family and was admired (if not agreed with) by his contemporaries. He was a remarkable public servant who deserves our thanks for his service. We need more people like him--who will put up with the slings and arrows for 30 years in the public limelight when he could be making millions upon millions in private practice.

I agree with most of your statements however, I think we should be looking for really fair impartial judges. With the exception of political junkies, I think this is really what most Americans want. In so many countries, judges are bought and paid for before they ever sit on the bench. They serve their masters, not the people.

I would invite you to closely examine Chief Justice Robert's status of "bought and paid for"; after being appointed by President Bush 43, I think those who bought Mr. Roberts may be asking for a refund. Additionally, didn't Anthony Kennedy get appointed by Reagan or Bush 41? Now he's seen as left leaning.

Moreover, I'll quote "Larry the Liquidator" from the great but overlooked movie, "Other People's Money". He is discussing lawyers with Penelope Ann Miller and comes off with this brilliant quote; "They're like nuclear warheads. They have theirs, so I have mine. Once you use them, they fuck up everything." If you can assure me that there will be no more Citizens United rulings, no more rulings that allow States to draw any voting district those in power want, allow companies sell our information to anyone with 2 nickles...I'll be happy to appoint Dudley Do-Right to the bench. Until then, I want someone who leans toward protecting privacy, protecting freedom of choice in reproductive rights, and someone who thinks there is probably some connection between 300 zillion guns on the streets and our outsized number of gun deaths

Whether we're conservative or liberal, we need to be looking for judges that know the law, the constitution, and can put their personal and political beliefs aside and judge cases based on their merit. Unfortunately in Washington, a good judge is one that will rule in favor of issues you support regardless of the law or case.

Well, that's just human nature when you have to be the decision maker or arbiter. It's a very tough gig and as I stated, I admire justices like Scalia who put up with 30 years of being called every name in the book when they could be pocketing 7 figures easily in the private sector.

---

I would be tickled pink if we could find a surrogate that agrees to serve until the Senate confirms a new justice. Get someone universally respected like Bob Dole or Warren Rudman or Sandra O'Connor to fill in until the new President is sworn in on the condition that there is no filibuster of the new President's choice. It would be a terrible deal for the Dems likely but we would have some decisions handed down instead of allowing partisan politics to first delay the decisions then delay the appointment of a new justice....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

McConnell correctly pointed out that the next President should get to pick the SCOTUS judge

 

[Votto]

Or... even worse for the GOP, Bernie could win. That's a serious gamble on their part.

If Obama nominates a moderate Hispanic, the GOP will be against a wall. Their true "right wing loser" colors will come out.

Somehow, I think sticking it to this President will override that concern. Who knows, maybe they know they already look like dirt to that demographic and will jsut say, "fuck it".

The political reality of Justice Scalia's death is likely the greatest blow to the Conservative Movement since Stonewall Jackson being killed by his own men. R.E. Lee was reported to have said that he had just lost "his right arm". The conservative anchor of the high court has passed. And us liberals have a golden opportunity to sieze the court for the next generation (or 2) if we don't screw up and nominate Bernie Sanders who simply cannot win in the General Election unless there is a MAJOR gaffe by his Republican Opponent. And by MAJOR gaffe, I'm saying something along the lines of using a racial slur or flashing a Crips or Bloods gang sign at a rally....

Its time for the Democrats to get serious about the election and install Secretary Clinton as their standard bearer. She is not only the best qualified person on either side in this election, she is the best qualified to take on the GOP. Obama's first year to eighteen months was almost criminally naive in terms of what he expected from Congress. Ms. Clinton will have no such illusions about the opposition. For them, it's party over people, principles that are for sale to the highest bidder, and a morally bankrupt constituency that seems to think a realty TV star is our best bet going forward.

These are the stakes; not only for the time and place but for the nation. I mean, who is he going to nominate for the High Court? Judge Judy...based on the fact that more people listen to her decisions than any other judge?


As we discuss the political reality, we should keep in mind that Justice Scalia had a large family and was admired (if not agreed with) by his contemporaries. He was a remarkable public servant who deserves our thanks for his service. We need more people like him--who will put up with the slings and arrows for 30 years in the public limelight when he could be making millions upon millions in private practice.

I agree with most of your statements however, I think we should be looking for really fair impartial judges. With the exception of political junkies, I think this is really what most Americans want. In so many countries, judges are bought and paid for before they ever sit on the bench. They serve their masters, not the people.

I would invite you to closely examine Chief Justice Robert's status of "bought and paid for"; after being appointed by President Bush 43, I think those who bought Mr. Roberts may be asking for a refund. Additionally, didn't Anthony Kennedy get appointed by Reagan or Bush 41? Now he's seen as left leaning.

Moreover, I'll quote "Larry the Liquidator" from the great but overlooked movie, "Other People's Money". He is discussing lawyers with Penelope Ann Miller and comes off with this brilliant quote; "They're like nuclear warheads. They have theirs, so I have mine. Once you use them, they fuck up everything." If you can assure me that there will be no more Citizens United rulings, no more rulings that allow States to draw any voting district those in power want, allow companies sell our information to anyone with 2 nickles...I'll be happy to appoint Dudley Do-Right to the bench. Until then, I want someone who leans toward protecting privacy, protecting freedom of choice in reproductive rights, and someone who thinks there is probably some connection between 300 zillion guns on the streets and our outsized number of gun deaths

Whether we're conservative or liberal, we need to be looking for judges that know the law, the constitution, and can put their personal and political beliefs aside and judge cases based on their merit. Unfortunately in Washington, a good judge is one that will rule in favor of issues you support regardless of the law or case.

Well, that's just human nature when you have to be the decision maker or arbiter. It's a very tough gig and as I stated, I admire justices like Scalia who put up with 30 years of being called every name in the book when they could be pocketing 7 figures easily in the private sector.

---

I would be tickled pink if we could find a surrogate that agrees to serve until the Senate confirms a new justice. Get someone universally respected like Bob Dole or Warren Rudman or Sandra O'Connor to fill in until the new President is sworn in on the condition that there is no filibuster of the new President's choice. It would be a terrible deal for the Dems likely but we would have some decisions handed down instead of allowing partisan politics to first delay the decisions then delay the appointment of a new justice....

SCOTUS is a joke. We know how they will rule before they ever do.

Here is the two things to know. They will rule in favor of something if:

1. It increases the power of the Federal government
2. And/or increases the power of corporate America which is one in the same.

It really is that easy.

 

[Votto]

McConnell correctly pointed out that the next President should get to pick the SCOTUS judge

I'm tired of watching the GOP stand up to Obama, and then just buckle.

It gets old after a while.