Breaking: Justice Scalia has died

[sealybobo]

Citizens United is now in real jeopardy. You can bet the Kock brothers are already on the phone to all Republicans "if you keep Obama from appointing anyone new I will promise you unlimited funding".

Republicans cannot postpone an appointment for a year. If they can then this form of government serves no purpose according to the Constitution. It is specifically written to prevent one interested party in taking over and controlling government at the expense of all other parties.

This will turn into a Constititonal crisis if Republicans try to usurp the president's powers 'just 'cuz the want to'.

^ that

=======
As we have seen with this Congress and Republicans over the last seven years ---

IT'S MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY

THE PARTY OF NO SAYS NO UNLESS WE WIN

The Republican Party of Deadbeats DOES NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO A PERMANENT REPUBLICAN MAJORITY ON THE SUPREME COURT.

geeze...another delusional lefty.

How did John Roberts vote on Obummercare?

The one thing!

So the gave us obamacare and gay marriage. Bfd.

He's not one of ours.

 

[paulitician]

All we can do now is stall and make sure an appointment gets held off till after the Election. And also pray we get a Pro-America/Pro Constitution President elected. This country can't afford to have another Big Government Globlalist Supreme Court Justice.

Yes we've done so well with the idiot thomas and others you really feel the need to go down the same track? That light you see isn't the end of the tunnel ,,,it's a train coming your way

No more Anti-American Globalists, We already have too many of them serving now. The country's at stake.

 

[Arizona Willie]

RIP

44 needs to get a Prog replacement in there immediately!!!
CrusaderFrank

Remember, we don't have to follow unjust rulings

"Progressive Fools made they decision; now let them enforce it!"

=========
The Constitution ( that Republicans claim to LOVE ) says Obama has the right and duty to nominate replacement Supreme Court Justices.

There is no restriction on nominating during his last year in office and, in fact, Republican Presidents have nominated during their last year.

The Contitution DOES NOT GIVE REPUBLICANS A RIGHT TO A PERMANENT SUPREME COURT MAJORITY.

What are Republicans going to do if they lose the next election and we get another Democratic President?

Going to DEMAND that he wait 4 more years until Repubs get another shot at it?

 

[EriktheRed]

Oh yeah. Obama's got a pen so he can nominate. Still, he doesn't have enough votes in the Senate so he can't confirm.

Too Bad!

That assumes all 54 senators are going to buck tradition and block his nominee. The last time that happened was when John Tyler was President.

Nope. Obama will get his nominee. Liberal Supreme Court, baby. Good bye Heller, Good Bye Citizens United.

Do these times seem at all "traditional" to you?

 

[Redfish]

RIP

44 needs to get a Prog replacement in there immediately!!!
CrusaderFrank

Remember, we don't have to follow unjust rulings

"Progressive Fools made they decision; now let them enforce it!"

=========
The Constitution ( that Republicans claim to LOVE ) says Obama has the right and duty to nominate replacement Supreme Court Justices.

There is no restriction on nominating during his last year in office and, in fact, Republican Presidents have nominated during their last year.

The Contitution DOES NOT GIVE REPUBLICANS A RIGHT TO A PERMANENT SUPREME COURT MAJORITY.

What are Republicans going to do if they lose the next election and we get another Democratic President?

Going to DEMAND that he wait 4 more years until Repubs get another shot at it?

correct, Obama can nominate someone during his last year, the senate can then confirm or deny the nomination. Obama is not a king, idiot.

 

[Arizona Willie]

Agit8r, post: 13510286, member: 26784"]I wonder what affect this may have on this year's cases

My surmise is the docket will be suspended.

============
This will not affect cases where they have already decided and written their opinions.
The decisions just haven't been published yet.

New and current cases before the Court can still go forward --- if they can reach a majority such as 5-3.

 

[sealybobo]

Bork???? the woman that Bush nominated????????. NO, the president does not always get his way and obozo will not be allowed to put another raving liberal on the court.

Why not Red? How long have republicans held the advantage for?? A new broom sweeps clean A dem on the SC will ""make America great again""

the court has been balanced with Kennedy as the swing vote. another lib will tilt it to the left and the country as a free democratic republic will be over. The GOP controls the senate, its an election year. Obozo will not be allowed to put another lib on the court.

he could recess appoint next January

The Senate will NEVER recess

Right, SCOTUS ruled that the senate must declare that it is in recess, the president can't do it.

Even if you don't let Obama nominate a justice that's great for us in November.

We dare you.

Thank you God. This proves gods a liberal

 

[paulitician]

They see America as merely another State in a 'Global Community.'

How very odd, since that's exactly what it is...

They don't represent the World's interests. They represent Americans and their Constitution. They're not the UN.

Nope, but the rest of the world matters and sometimes their laws are better than ours. Use what works, not just what you yourself invented. Think beyond your own tiny spot on earth.

"Those ______s have cars, but we're Americans, so we'll stick with horses" is no way to approach life.

How the rest of the world views anything is irrelevant. Supreme Court Justices represent America and its Constitution. The Big Government Globalists don't have America's best interests in mind. They don't feel any real allegiance to the country or the Constitution. We definitely don't need more of them serving on our Supreme Court.

Some people, not you, can keep more than one thing in their minds at the same time. America is not the only country that matters, even to Americans.

As far as the U.S. Supreme Court goes, America IS the only country that matters. That's the job. They wanna be Big Government Globalists, let em go work for the UN.

 

[jon_berzerk]

RIP

44 needs to get a Prog replacement in there immediately!!!
CrusaderFrank

Remember, we don't have to follow unjust rulings

"Progressive Fools made they decision; now let them enforce it!"

=========
The Constitution ( that Republicans claim to LOVE ) says Obama has the right and duty to nominate replacement Supreme Court Justices.

There is no restriction on nominating during his last year in office and, in fact, Republican Presidents have nominated during their last year.

The Contitution DOES NOT GIVE REPUBLICANS A RIGHT TO A PERMANENT SUPREME COURT MAJORITY.

What are Republicans going to do if they lose the next election and we get another Democratic President?

Going to DEMAND that he wait 4 more years until Repubs get another shot at it?

key word >>nominate<<


that is it that is all

 

[Arizona Willie]

Oh yeah. Obama's got a pen so he can nominate. Still, he doesn't have enough votes in the Senate so he can't confirm.

Too Bad!

That assumes all 54 senators are going to buck tradition and block his nominee. The last time that happened was when John Tyler was President.

Nope. Obama will get his nominee. Liberal Supreme Court, baby. Good bye Heller, Good Bye Citizens United.

Do these times seem at all "traditional" to you?

===
Two words

RECESS APPOINTMENT

not a damn thing Republicans can do about it.

IT'S CONSTITUTIONAL AND HAS PRECEDENT

 

[eagle1462010]

Agit8r, post: 13510286, member: 26784"]I wonder what affect this may have on this year's cases

My surmise is the docket will be suspended.

============
This will not affect cases where they have already decided and written their opinions.
The decisions just haven't been published yet.

New and current cases before the Court can still go forward --- if they can reach a majority such as 5-3.

In the event of a tie the lower court ruling stands.

 

[Redfish]

Agit8r, post: 13510286, member: 26784"]I wonder what affect this may have on this year's cases

My surmise is the docket will be suspended.

============
This will not affect cases where they have already decided and written their opinions.
The decisions just haven't been published yet.

New and current cases before the Court can still go forward --- if they can reach a majority such as 5-3.

if there are only 8 justices and there is a 4/4 tie, then the lower court ruling becomes law. Not having the 9th justice will not stop the country.

 

[Arizona Willie]

How did he "pervert" it? How do you pervert what is already perverted?

Oh look, Mr. Unelected Tyrannical Judges suddenly falls in love with the Court.

not to mention the "we the people" losers forget that "we the people" elected this president twice and WANT him to nominate justices.

little maroons.

he can nominate all he wants

getting in though may be harder

--LOL

so "we the people" only matters when it's the winger brigade at the far right of the loony spectrum?

okie dokie, nut bar.

hey cry all you want but just because a prezbo picks one

does not mean they get the seat

it is a fact

============
Recess appointment if the Senate blocks voting on his nominee(s)

Republicans DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO A PERMANENT SUPREME COURT MAJORITY

 

[WorldWatcher]

You can do recess appointments, but they are not permanent. If Obama appoints anyone to a recess appointment, they will be out of office in December anyway because the Congressional session ends.

If the GOP stalls on confirming a nomination and then goes into recess in December 2016, the appointment doesn't' expire until the end of the next session which would be December 2017. "Next session" is the language in Article 2 Section 2.

>>>>

 

[Redfish]

Why not Red? How long have republicans held the advantage for?? A new broom sweeps clean A dem on the SC will ""make America great again""

the court has been balanced with Kennedy as the swing vote. another lib will tilt it to the left and the country as a free democratic republic will be over. The GOP controls the senate, its an election year. Obozo will not be allowed to put another lib on the court.

he could recess appoint next January

The Senate will NEVER recess

Right, SCOTUS ruled that the senate must declare that it is in recess, the president can't do it.

Even if you don't let Obama nominate a justice that's great for us in November.

We dare you.

Thank you God. This proves gods a liberal

poor bobo, dumb as a sack of lizards.

 

[dani67]

please explain it .
if republican refuse obama nominee in senate.then what can obama do ?

 

[Redfish]

Oh look, Mr. Unelected Tyrannical Judges suddenly falls in love with the Court.

not to mention the "we the people" losers forget that "we the people" elected this president twice and WANT him to nominate justices.

little maroons.

he can nominate all he wants

getting in though may be harder

--LOL

so "we the people" only matters when it's the winger brigade at the far right of the loony spectrum?

okie dokie, nut bar.

hey cry all you want but just because a prezbo picks one

does not mean they get the seat

it is a fact

============
Recess appointment if the Senate blocks voting on his nominee(s)

Republicans DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO A PERMANENT SUPREME COURT MAJORITY

the senate will not declare itself in recess, a recess appointment will never happen.

 

[bripat9643]

I sense they do not want "some Negro President" selecting a Supreme Court nominee.....it ain't proper......

No one gives a damn about his color. The fact that he's a commie is what bothers us.

======
And it's the fact you are a LIAR that bothers us

what have I lied about?

 

[Redfish]

please explain it .
if republican refuse obama nominee in senate.then what can obama do ?

nominate someone else.

 

[WorldWatcher]

if there are only 8 justices and there is a 4/4 tie, then the lower court ruling becomes law. Not having the 9th justice will not stop the country.

Not true.

If there is a 4/4 split the lower court ruling is allowed to stand, however it is only applicable to that case and in that jurisdiction. Tie decisions to not set national precedence.


>>>>