Justice Antonin Scalia

Home Forums Politics Justice Antonin Scalia

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #617237
    Joseph
    Participant

    The United States Senate should kill any nominee that isn’t of the same ideological composition as Justice Antonin Scalia. The Constitutional prerogative of the Senate to provide “advice and consent” should be exercised to advise the President that only a Scalia-type nominee will be consented to. Any other type of nominee shall result in the Senate exercising its Constitutional right to withhold consent.

    #1191110
    10-Luchos
    Participant

    1. That isn’t happening. Please stop your lunatic rants

    2. The senators need to be very careful here. Just because the republicans have a majority now, doesn’t mean they would have one in January of 2017. They should use their power to make sure the newly appointed justice is more center than left. If they hold out they can lose their power all together and we’ll get another Kagan.

    #1191111
    Joseph
    Participant

    1. Exactly the point. Since it isn’t happening the nomination needs to be rejected.

    2. Obama will not be nominating anyone who isn’t a liberal/left-wing activist judge. So the point is moot. The Senate needs to reject the nomination.

    The Republicans are unlikely to lose the Senate (plus the presidential elections). And even if they might, it is worth the risk of rejecting the nomination this year. Obama’s nomination is unlikely to be much better than Clinton’s. And the Republicans may be able to control the appointment next year, as an upside.

    Considering the stakes at hand, an appointment that can last 30 years and flip the court to full liberal control now, it would be extremely foolhardy for Republicans to give this to Obama.

    #1191112
    ubiquitin
    Participant

    Will you say the same thing when Ruth Bader Ginsberg Dies/Retires?

    That “The United States Senate should kill any nominee that isn’t of the same ideological composition as Justice [Ginsberg]”?

    #1191113
    Joseph
    Participant

    ubiq: No. I would say the Republicans should use whatever power and/or leverage they have at the time to get a conservative replacement for Ginsberg. The point about demanding a conservative replacement now for Scalia is merely as a political ploy, knowing it won’t happen with Obama. (If shockingly he does nominate a soulmate of Scalia, then by all means let the Senate confirm it.)

    I have no doubts or illusions that the Democrats would play the same political hardball had the situation been in the reverse. The Republicans shouldn’t be stupid now and kneel over for an Obama appointment when the Democrats will never do that in the (past or) future when they control the Senate.

    #1191114
    Joseph
    Participant

    From the President’s perspective, the best move he could make is to make a recess appointment, something he can do now that the Senate is in recess. The appointment, I believe, would last through the court’s 2017 term. This would give the court a liberal majority for over a year. And considering it is almost certain Obama will not be getting to appoint a permanent Justice to the court, this move would give him the most influence he can achieve with the cards he’s been dealt.

    I, of course, hope he does not make a recess appointment since that would tilt some critical decisions leftwards.

    #1191115

    The United States Senate should kill any nominee that isn’t

    of the same ideological composition as Justice Antonin Scalia.

    Do we have the death penalty for that?

    #1191116
    Joseph
    Participant

    Well, Mr. Luchos, my suggested gambit has paid off and proven correct, you’ll have to admit.

    #1191117
    WolfishMusings
    Participant

    Well, Mr. Luchos, my suggested gambit has paid off and proven correct, you’ll have to admit.

    And when the power shifts and the Democrats have the Senate in a Republican president’s fourth year, you’re not going to get a conservative jurist on the bench then either.

    The sword swings both ways.

    The Wolf

    #1191118
    Mammele
    Participant

    Wolf: correct, but now we need to replace one justice. And he or she will most likely be a conservative, given the Republican control. We don’t know what the situation will be in four years.

    #1191119
    Joseph
    Participant

    That’s a price well worth potentially paying, Mr. Wolf, for having very successfully staved off a radical swing right now from a centrist court to a liberal court that would have had generation lasting ramifications.

    #1191120
    akuperma
    Participant

    The liklihood is that Trump will be able to replace not only Scalia but also Ginsburg and Kennedy and perhaps Breyer as well. This would mean that by 2024 (if Trump gets re-elected, and the Senate stays Republican) the court will tend to be 7-2 for conservatives and originalists. Since the court in recent years has moved away from deciding cases based on precedent, it will be open season for revisiting many of the socially controversial cases.

    #1191121
    benignuman
    Participant

    Ginsburg and Breyer will not retire while Trump is President. Trump will only get to replace them if they die. Also, assuming the Trump will nominate originalists is tenuous.

    #1191122
    Joseph
    Participant

    benignuman, they might become incapacitated (health) or pass away during his term(s).

    I understand that Trump pledged to only only nominate conservatives in the mold of Scalia, who are pro-life, etc. And produced a list of judges conservatives are happy with.

    #1191123
    popa_bar_abba
    Participant

    Also, assuming the Trump will nominate originalists is tenuous.

    he could always imitate the left and nominate ideologues. Gets to a similar place.

    #1191124
    benignuman
    Participant

    Joseph,

    He did do that, but Trump keeping a pledge is not something I would hang my hat on.

    PBA,

    How many conservative ideologue judges are there? If they just rubber stamp government positions it will be tragic.

    #1191126
    yehudayona
    Participant

    Trump, at 70, is the oldest person ever elected president. My guess is that he will be at most a one-term president. One thing we don’t have to worry about — unlike Obama, his hair won’t turn gray.

    One other thing — he’s probably going to be the last draft dodger elected president. The draft effectively ended in 1972, so you’d have to have been born before 1953 to have been drafted.

    #1191127
    Joseph
    Participant

    Trump isn’t much older than Reagan was when first elected. Hillary isn’t much younger than him either. Bloomberg, who seriously considered running, is a number of years older than Trump.

    #1191128
    147
    Participant

    Justice Antonin Scalia ?’? tragically was assassinated by someone who was a liberal; Hence they signed off on a suspicious death without an autopsy. Strange? .. This was the beginning of the end for Hillary’s campaign.

Viewing 19 posts - 1 through 19 (of 19 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.