Posted in National Politics, News, Those Kooky Conservatives!

So let’s talk about that Supreme Court vacancy…

   February 15, 2016

The lengths Republicans in Congress will go to obstruct President Barack Obama (while in the process not doing their jobs) seems to know no limits, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky issued a statement just an hour after Associate Justice Antonin Scalia’s death was announced making it clear Republicans in the Senate had no intentions of doing their jobs and considering any nominee put forth by President Obama to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate should not confirm a replacement for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia until after the 2016 election — an historic rebuke of President Obama’s authority and an extraordinary challenge to the practice of considering each nominee on his or her individual merits.

The swiftness of McConnell’s statement — coming about an hour after Scalia’s death in Texas had been confirmed — stunned White House officials who had expected the Kentucky Republican to block their nominee with every tool at his disposal, but didn’t imagine the combative GOP leader would issue an instant, categorical rejection of anyone Obama chose to nominate.

It’s worth noting the longest Supreme Court confirmation process from nomination to resolution was Louis Brandeis at 125 days, and with President Obama having just under a year left in office it would be historic if he nominated someone to replace Antonin Scalia and the Senate failed to take action on that nominee.

Share:

Related Articles

19 thoughts on “So let’s talk about that Supreme Court vacancy…”

  1. This is going to be an old fashioned bare knuckle fight between Obama and Oh McConnell.

    But it may be one too many dirty trick by MM.

    I foresee if Oh McConnell defies tradition, ethics, and common sense, he ensures a Hillary or Bernie in the White House and eventually a lefty appointed to the Supreme Court..

  3. I wonder how the extreme religious right who believe in divine signs will interpret the death of Scalia, especially at this critical time of political effects?

    I see it as nothing more than a man who had reached a few years beyond the statistical age of life expectancy for a white male.

  5. Oh Nemo, how about “Obama’s Supreme Court Shortlist” and their superior, no baggage qualifications?

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/02/obama_s_supreme_court_shortlist_is_full_of_great_candidates.html

    “SriSrivasan…”
    “Patricia Ann Millett…”
    “Paul Watford…”
    “Merrick Garlanfd…”
    “Goodwin Liu…”
    “David Barron…”
    “Loretta Lynch…”
    “Jane Kelly…”
    “Kamala Harris…”
    “Jacqueline Nguyen…”
    “Robert L Wilkins…”
    and”…heaps more perfectly qualified …”

    Read and marvel at Obama’s short list!

    My personal favorite is Loretta Lynch, currently Attorney general of the United States, and previously confirmed by Congress.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/loretta-lynch-confirmed-senate-attorney-general-n347066

    So what;s the problem?

    1. Duane12, the problem is the Republican Senate. None of those short listers would have a chance in the upper chamber. Loretta Lynch would be particularly interesting. The FBI is going to ask for an indictment of Hillary in the next few months. Loretta will tell them, “No, indictments are only issued for ‘little people’.” (She’s unlikely to use those exact words, but you get the point). Gonna be fun.

  6. Paul Watford and Sri Srivasan are the two names I’ve heard most frequently mentioned, and from what I know Srivasan would be the more moderate choice (he was last confirmed 97-0 if memory serves me) while Watford seems to be more a liberal.

    1. Still, if the choice is between liberal and more liberal, the nominee will fail. My personal nightmare is if Obama puts up a true moderate, say the tea party unfavorite Lindsey Graham. Then it gets interesting. I don’t think that the Republicans could not vote for him and the court would move to the left. I don’t think the “Great Divider” is that smart though. At least I hope not.

      1. Nemo,

        I’ve never heard Sen. Graham (Wing nut-South Carolina) described as a “moderate.”

        Who besides you thinks that?

        1. John,
          Google “Lindsey Graham moderate” and you’ll get 153,000,000 results.

          Ballotpedia states:

          “Based on analysis of multiple outside rankings, Graham is a more moderate right of center Republican Party vote. As a result, he may break with the Republican Party line more than his fellow members. ”

          Is he Bernie Sanders? No, but a Sanders type doesn’t stand a chance. The question you have to ask is how much are you willing to risk to push the court to the left. Justice Graham would move the court towards the center and beyond far more than any nominee put forth by President Cruz.

  12. FYI: VP Joe Biden on TRMS tonight: “We have a dysfunctional Congress; we do not need a dysfunctional Supreme Court.”

    Amen Brother Biden!

  13. Rev. ;Sharpton opined today on MSNBC that if the Senate blocks a vote for the Supreme Court replacement, it will result in a massive Dem turnout at the polls at all levels.

  14. Yes, let’s continue to talk about that Supreme Court vacancy!

    “Supreme Court Nominees in Election Years Are Usually Confirmed.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/02/15/us/supreme-court-nominations-election-year-scalia.html?_r=0

    Mitch McConnell is maniacal, mistaken, and misleading regarding his public obsession to defy and defeat President Obama. I would not be surprised if history will compare and group McConnell with the likes of Bull Conner, George Wallace, and other racists in blocking, legal or otherwise, the emancipation and equality of African American citizens be they a president or not.

Comments are closed.