My gut tells me they will, just as they have everything else...
Will the Republican cave on Obama's appointment to the Court?
- Thread starter Grey Colson
- Start date
Blazing Saddles
Pursuit Driver
I don't think they will.
Man, I hope you're right. They don't need to buy the dems assertion that obstructing on this issue will hurt them in the general election. They need to get it through their heads that NO democrat is going to advise the republican's what may hurt them in the general election. To believe that is the height of foolishness.
I hope you're right but I wouldn't bet the farm on it. IMO this would justify "shutting down" the gov't if it came to it. Something tells me they will cave as they have done time and time again even after winning back control. If they do...I'll will forever be a Libertarian voter, regardless to whether or not that candidate has a chance of winning.
Already thought about that. Then again, if that ever happens you can mark the day as the beginning of the 2nd Revolution.
Winchester
When you need FIREPOWER!
Too many people are watching this issue already, I don't think the GOP will let this one slide.
lotstodo
aka "The Jackal"
Hard to say. If Obama puts up a relative moderate and tells them he will withdraw the nomination before the summer it will be hard for them to not bite because the Dems might win the Presidency again. If he puts forward a liberal they will block until the cows come home because there is nothing to lose.
Boss 302
Pursuit Driver
What the Republicans need to continue pushing to the public is how it was a Democratic controlled Congress who passed a resolution calling for presidents in their last year to not appoint a new justice to the SCOTUS in an election year. "The Democrats always demand we Republicans should always play by their rules. Now we are playing by one the Democratic controlled Senate passed in 1960 that called for presidents not to make an appointment to the Supreme Court during an election year because they believed the new president should make that appointment. Now we are in a presidential election year and a vacancy to the high court has been created with the unfortunate death of Justice Scalia and the Democrats are demanding the Republican controlled Senate confirm an Obama appointment to the court before a new president has been sworn into office. This is just another example of how the Democratic Party wishes to change the rules in a middle of a game to suit their own agenda. We will honor the 1960 resolution."
Chindog
Expert Driver
Seems like they are getting squishy already. Thanks Chuck Grassly and Thom Tillis.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/16/gop-signs-back-down-vow-block-obama-scotus-nominee/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/16/gop-signs-back-down-vow-block-obama-scotus-nominee/
LisaC
I'm here to spin the moral compass.
lotstodo
aka "The Jackal"
I read a good article the other day, but I can't find it now. Basically it said that Scalia's best legacy will be how he spoke of originalism and how that affected the current crop of Constitutional attorneys in the country right now. The author's premise was that prior to the last 20 years the theory of a living Constitution was so prevalent that even most conservative judges believed in it. The only difference between conservative and liberal justices was which way they wanted to pull the Constitution. Scalia changed that in a big way. In fact, according to the author who is a Constitutional Law professor at I believe UCLA ( or similar liberal bastion, I'm not sure), even many liberal federal judges now believe in the concept of originalism. He quoted som recent lower court decisions to prove his point, and it actually made some sense. In reality, all I want is an originalist. A good originalist will strongly limit the application of their personal beliefs in to their decisions. I think that the biggest way originalism comes out is in the refusal to take cases that smack of lawmaking. As Scalia said, "You want gay marriage? Fine. Pass a law and you have gay marriage. The Constitution says nothing about it".
Which is why the SCOTUS decision on Same-sex marriage was a bad one. It's not a matter of whether or not legalizing SSM is the right thing to do; the SCOTUS effectively made up a law where there wasn't one. And that could open the door to more of it.