Some simple facts about our current and future Supreme Court

[bendog]

Speaking of simple, currently there is a widely circulated video of former senator Joe Biden in 1992 emphatically stating that the democrat controlled senate will not consider a supreme court nominee during Bush Sr.'s term.

Turns out that's not quite what he said. Paperview put up a link on post 801 on the thread Should Obama nominate a justice or not?

 

[nat4900]

I don't thing Bork was a fascist. He simply didn't believe in any right that was not specifically identified in the BoR. I doubt he thought congress had the power to force southern restaurants to contract with African americans for food. He believed that the political process, and not the judicial process, should work out stuff like what abortions are legal. But he also did not believe in stare decisis, at least for issues that may be wrongfully decided but which the decision is more or less working.

Ideology aside, I disliked Bork when he became complicit with Nixon during the Saturday Night Massacre where better men (people) decided to stick by their ethics and defy the oval office...For his part, Bork was "promised" a seat in the SC...
A Faustian deal that fortunately did not pan out.

 

[Agit8r]

the fact that the SC may soon have a 5-4 “bent” for more liberal causes is just a “swing of the pendulum” after 20 plus years of right leaning decisions.

I'd say that it's a return to normalcy.

 

[deltex1]

Fact 1: There is NO doubt that for the last 2 decades, the SCOTUS has been right leaning with dozens of decisions rendered 5-4 in favor of conservative causes. Reagan's and Bush's 2 term presidencies ensured such leanings.

Fact 2: Regardless of how we would all like for Justices in the SC to be 100% impartial, each individual who has served as Justice carries a certain amount of political bias and not even the Founders could have avoided such partialities and such is not necessarily a bad thing…We are ALL judged by our peers and we all know of our own frailties, biases and prejudices. (Note that Tocqueville in his Democracy in America commented that America has a tacit wish for a nobility class and shows this in its justice system by having judges wear robes and be referred to as “your honor”)

Fact 3: The Founders, in their wisdom, chose to state (Article 2) that an elected president….NOT Congress (i.e. Senate) nor the electorate……nominates a Justice when a position is vacant, while the senate confirms (or not).

Fact 4: Obama was elected TWICE, showing that the majority of voters wanted his policies to proceed.

Fact 5: Based on Fact 4, Obama’s future (and past) nominees will reflect the leanings of his policies since elections DO have consequences…..

Lastly, as has been often cited before, Obama was elected for FOUR full years, not 3 years, and the fact that the SC may soon have a 5-4 “bent” for more liberal causes is just a “swing of the pendulum” after 20 plus years of right leaning decisions.

Facts that don't change the fact that the Senate will not consider Obama's nomination.

 

[nat4900]

Facts that don't change the fact that the Senate will not consider Obama's nomination.

As a liberal, I sure hope (sincerely) that the senate GOpers do NOT consider the nominee......Remember Ali's "rope-a-dope" stratagem?

 

[SuperDemocrat]

I can't wait until the old liberals on SCOTUS die off.

 

[nat4900]

I can't wait until the old liberals on SCOTUS die off.

Agreed, to prevent that, they've been warned to not go to luxury ranches in Texas.