Should Obama nominate a justice or not?

[Care4all]

We know how this will play out...

1. Obama will nominate a new justice soon. It'll be the one of the few things he gets done quickly.
2. The Republican Senate will not approve of the nominee (as they shouldn't)
3. Democrats will accuse Republicans of playing politics and holding up progress. (they would do the same thing) They'll make up slogans like "GOP war on America". They'll ride this all the way to the November election.
4. America will decide the next justice with the election. (as it should be)

the Constitution says it IS THE PRESIDENT who is responsible for choosig Supreme Court Justices, NOT "America" as you State....though America already gave their pick as President for 8 years.

The next president will have 3 Justices to replace.... 4 is way too many, for the court not to be considered Politically "Stacked", and that would be an INJUSTICE to all Americans.

 

[Fang]

America will decide the next justice with the election. (as it should be)

In other words the last year of an administration is really a sabbatical for all of congress?

I'm not saying that at all.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

He will nominate someone and the GOP need to understand that they need to fill that vacancy before November or it will look bad on their part for being too Partisan and Hostile.

Just fill the vacancy and pick another battle to stand your ground on.

 

[Fang]

We know how this will play out...

1. Obama will nominate a new justice soon. It'll be the one of the few things he gets done quickly.
2. The Republican Senate will not approve of the nominee (as they shouldn't)
3. Democrats will accuse Republicans of playing politics and holding up progress. (they would do the same thing) They'll make up slogans like "GOP war on America". They'll ride this all the way to the November election.
4. America will decide the next justice with the election. (as it should be)

the Constitution says it IS THE PRESIDENT who is responsible for choosig Supreme Court Justices, NOT "America" as you State....though America already gave their pick as President for 8 years.

The next president will have 3 Justices to replace.... 4 is way too many, for the court not to be considered Politically "Stacked", and that would be an INJUSTICE to all Americans.

Good God. No shit. It was a metaphor. And you guys call yourselves "progressives"? LOL

 

[Billy_Bob]

Next President Should Appoint SC Justice, Not Obama


From IJR:

“Justice Scalia’s fidelity to the Constitution was rivaled only by the love of his family: his wife Maureen his nine children, and his many grandchildren. Through the sheer force of his intellect and his legendary wit, this giant of American jurisprudence almost singlehandedly revived an approach to constitutional interpretation that prioritized the text and original meaning of the Constitution. Elaine and I send our deepest condolences to the entire Scalia family.”

…

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”


Use the nuclear option that Democrats used on Obama care to stifle any and all candidates he presents.. I am good with this line of attack on the socialists and their wet dreams of being kings..

 

[Geaux4it]

Agreed

-Geaux

 

[oreo]

First let me state (and I can say this as a fellow Sicilian-American) that Scalia will be regarded as one of the most acerbic, often mean-spirited, partisan in the modern Supreme Court.

But the question asked should be answered. Should Obama nominate to the Senate his choice to fill Scalia's seat? Bear in mind that there are still 11 months before a new president enters the oval office.

Regardless of the upcoming turbulent months, we should be mindful of the many changes that 2017 will usher to the political status quo: A new President......a new Senate makeup, and, of course, a much different Supreme Court in its ideological leanings.

With Republicans holding the Senate--it doesn't matter who he nominates--no new Supreme Court Justice will be appointed until after the election. Not unless Obama nominates a conservative justice--and then and only then would the senate approve him/her.

 

[I amso IR]

Like it truly matters with regards to who, where, what, when or why. The left pulled their hair out with Roberts and look at what we got. The person nominated will most likely be from the "Age of Aquarius", a San Francisco hippie (reformed). He/she will be a Yale or Harvard graduate who has spent their entire life eating from gold and driving a BMW. America's elite are now chosen well in advance and harbor many hidden agendas. Why worry about a sure thing?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Rest In Peace... Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia..

His passing will become a constitutional crisis..

 

[nat4900]

I'm not saying that at all.

Well, let me ask I another way:

1. Was Obama re-elected for 3 or 4 years of his second term?

2. Is it the president constitutionally bound to nominate someone to a SC vacancy?

 

[Geaux4it]

Wonder if Hillary had a grudge against him like Foster... and we all know what happen to that poor old man

-Geaux

 

[Fang]

First let me state (and I can say this as a fellow Sicilian-American) that Scalia will be regarded as one of the most acerbic, often mean-spirited, partisan in the modern Supreme Court.

But the question asked should be answered. Should Obama nominate to the Senate his choice to fill Scalia's seat? Bear in mind that there are still 11 months before a new president enters the oval office.

Regardless of the upcoming turbulent months, we should be mindful of the many changes that 2017 will usher to the political status quo: A new President......a new Senate makeup, and, of course, a much different Supreme Court in its ideological leanings.

With Republicans holding the Senate--it doesn't matter who he nominates--no new Supreme Court Justice will be appointed until after the election. Not unless Obama nominates a conservative justice--and then and only then would the senate approve him/her.

Well there is that. He could actually nominate someone Republicans would agree with. But we all know that ain't happening. The GOP Senate needs to stand on this one and let the chips fall where they may in regards to the election.

 

[HenryBHough]

Does anyone really think O'Bumbles could have the wit to come up with an acceptable candidate? Even a minimally acceptable one?

Guaranteed it'll be someone as "acceptable" as Eric Holder or even Mrs. Rodham-Clinton/Lewinsky. What a graceful way for her to end her doomed campaign! As a court nominee she'd HAVE to drop out and leave a clear field for whoever George Soros will anoint to ride the white (but not TOO white) horse down the center aisle!

 

[Billy_Bob]

Wonder if Hillary had a grudge against him like Foster... and we all know what happen to that poor old man

-Geaux

The press release says he was "found". There is no indication if foul play is suspected, but after the crushing ruling on Obama's EPA power grab I would not rule this out. I hope that a very thorough investigation into his death is done. This has potential nation changing consequences. Ones I had hope Obama was not able to make in his time as president. We have but one option and that is to block all nominees, as we know he will choose radical leftists.

 

[nat4900]

With Republicans holding the Senate--it doesn't matter who he nominates--no new Supreme Court Justice will be appointed until after the election. Not unless Obama nominates a conservative justice--and then and only then would the senate approve him/her.

Well, the senate voted 98 to 0 when confirming Scalia.....Do you think that the entire senate back then was conservative?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

There is nothing that says a SCOTUS judge can't be appointed during an election year. Republicans simply don't want to see the court with a Democratic majority.

 

[Fang]

I'm not saying that at all.

Well, let me ask I another way:

1. Was Obama re-elected for 3 or 4 years of his second term?

2. Is it the president constitutionally bound to nominate someone to a SC vacancy?

How many voters in 2012 had supreme court justice as a top 5 item on their mind when entering (or not entering) the booth? I bet it was less than 10% and I'd even say it never crossed the minds of most people at all.

The real question is if roles were reversed would Democrats wait for the election? Of course they would and we both know that to be true. It's how politics is played.

 

[Freewill]

A few points:

1. he was 79, although not ancient it isn't surprising that his ticker might have just stopped.

2. # 1 does not mean it was natural causes.

3. Obama will never wait, he will appoint some lesbian liberal next week, would be my guess.

4. considering the latest ruling and Roberts being a closet liberal his death and appointment of a liberal judge will only make it easier for Roberts to vote in the minority while the ruling he wants is still passed by the majority. That frees Roberts up to write and rewrite laws.

 

[Billy_Bob]

There is nothing that says a SCOTUS judge can't be appointed during an election year. Republicans simply don't want to see the court with a Democratic majority.

Actually, I dont want to see what is left of our Constitution and its limitations on executive power bastardized further. The fact that the court has shredded the founding documents on many occasions is proof that it must be maintained strict constitutional construction based. Social justice is not justice of any kind and must be stopped on all levels.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Eisenhower gave us Justice Brennan in a recess appointment. Obama should do this!