Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

thelawlorfaithful

SCOTUS goes nuclear

Recommended Posts

Bad move by the Dems in my opinion.  Nuclear option to confirm a solid pick like Gorsuch makes the nuclear option to replace RBG or Kennedy with a further right nominee in the next year or two less of a big deal than it otherwise would have been. 

The future practice of SCOTUS confirmations has been forever changed.

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pokebball said:

Bad move by the Dems in my opinion.  Nuclear option to confirm a solid pick like Gorsuch makes the nuclear option to replace RBG or Kennedy with a further right nominee in the next year or two less of a big deal than it otherwise would have been. 

The future practice of SCOTUS confirmations has been forever changes.

I agree it's a bad move, and very unfortunate, but I also think it was inevitable. Roy Blunt was interviewed on NPR last night and basically said the same thing. He said that if it didn't happen this time it would happen next time. Just the hyperpartisan times we live in.

In the longer term, the ball is back in the GOP's court. Will they resist the urge to change the rules on legislation?

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There really is no need for the Senate anymore. if I had my way the 17th Amendment would be repealed and Senators would be elected by the state legislature again. By having the senators elected by the citizens the senators have not incentive to vote for what their state wants. It used to be the reverse. Senators acted in the best interest of their state and if not they could be removed. Now the senators can vote based on special interests. Honestly the way it is now with tradition and Senate rules destroyed the Senate is just a smaller version of the House.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Akkula said:

I am just excited to see that we are finally going to get justice Obama in there!  Totally worth it!  Lots of hope and change coming to the court!

He will write sparkling dissent after dissent after 6-3 decisions. Enjoy.

We’re all sitting in the dugout. Thinking we should pitch. How you gonna throw a shutout when all you do is bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Akkula said:

I am just excited to see that we are finally going to get justice Obama in there!  Totally worth it!  Lots of hope and change coming to the court!

Nah, I doubt anyone will touch him once he is tried for illegally surveilling Trump. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

I agree it's a bad move, and very unfortunate, but I also think it was inevitable. Roy Blunt was interviewed on NPR last night and basically said the same thing. He said that if it didn't happen this time it would happen next time. Just the hyperpartisan times we live in.

In the longer term, the ball is back in the GOP's court. Will they resist the urge to change the rules on legislation?

Interesting question.  In a way I think the ball is rolling that direction, right?

The World Needs More Cowboys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, pokebball said:

Bad move by the Dems in my opinion.  Nuclear option to confirm a solid pick like Gorsuch makes the nuclear option to replace RBG or Kennedy with a further right nominee in the next year or two less of a big deal than it otherwise would have been. 

The future practice of SCOTUS confirmations has been forever changed.

 

1 hour ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

I agree it's a bad move, and very unfortunate, but I also think it was inevitable. Roy Blunt was interviewed on NPR last night and basically said the same thing. He said that if it didn't happen this time it would happen next time. Just the hyperpartisan times we live in.

In the longer term, the ball is back in the GOP's court. Will they resist the urge to change the rules on legislation?

Yeah, I didn't see that there was any downside for the Dems in forcing the nuclear option. Agree with Blunt that if it wasn't this time, it would be the next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, renoskier said:

 

Yeah, I didn't see that there was any downside for the Dems in forcing the nuclear option. Agree with Blunt that if it wasn't this time, it would be the next.

Really?  It is looking more and more likely that Republicans will increase the stranglehold in the senate in 2018 and Trump will likely be a two term president.  I see a few more seats going the rights way before all is said and done and they will likely be far to the right of Gorsuch since they do not have to worry about bipartisan support.  Likely Trump will continue to nominate younger judges as well.  This pretty much insured a conservative supreme court for over a decade.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, halfmanhalfbronco said:

Really?  It is looking more and more likely that Republicans will increase the stranglehold in the senate in 2018 and Trump will likely be a two term president.  I see a few more seats going the rights way before all is said and done and they will likely be far to the right of Gorsuch since they do not have to worry about bipartisan support.  Likely Trump will continue to nominate younger judges as well.  This pretty much insured a conservative supreme court for over a decade.

 

Why do you think they care about bipartisan support?

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...