# Obama must be allowed to nominate the next SCOTUS Justice **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 13, 2016, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061 "2016-02-13T23:23:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2016, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/141 "2016-02-14T23:56:51Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > So, the Senate decides to not allow any confirmation process to initiate. What are the possible options to force their hand? Not asking for what the good ideas are, just what any options they have are. > > - Recess appointment? Anything else? Recess appointment is only an option if the Senate decides it is in recess. Those pro forma sessions where someone raps a gavel once every three days are legally sufficient to prevent a recess appointment. This was decided in a unanimous vote by the Supreme Court [NLRB v Canning](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLRB_v._Noel_Canning) just a couple years ago. > [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > If there’s no Constitutional limit on “temporary” that could be years … decades … There is a [Constitutional limit on recess appointments](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_3:_Recess_appointments). > [@Article II](#): > > The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions **which shall expire at the End of their next Session.** Should the Republicans recess to permit Obama to make an appointment, that appointment would expire at the end of the next session of the Senate. Fighting ignorance. It’s taking longer than we expected. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/142 "2016-02-15T00:38:41Z")
What _could_ happen: Obama makes a nomination for the seat; the Senate totally stonewalls; the Senate and the WH change hands in the November election; Democratic Senate convenes on January 3rd, approves Obama’s choice, before the new President can be inaugurated on the 20th. Not very likely, but possible. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/143 "2016-02-15T00:50:08Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Well, Janice Brown is probably too Libertarian for Obama. If you were thinking Judith Rogers, she’s in her late 70s, and he’d probably want to pick somebody younger. Ann Williams might be a good pick, or Leah Sears. The only choice there that would make heads explode, though, would be Brown. But the Republicans would probably like her. > > Personally, I’d like to see him nominate Akhil Reed Amar, but… I was specifically thinking of one named Hill, who is, TBMK, somewhat conservative (_actually_ conservative, not like today’s Rs) ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/144 "2016-02-15T00:55:03Z")
> [@TonySinclair](#): > > They can’t stop Obama from nominating a justice; all they can do is refuse to hold a vote on his confirmation, and that’s exactly what they’ll do. As I just posted in the Stupid Republican thread, there’s no way to avoid that, but hopefully it will enrage the lazy Democratic electorate enough to get off their asses and go to the polls in November. More importantly, the middle is what wins and loses elections. And the middle likes moderation and cooperation. Obstructionism might motivate that large middle. ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/145 "2016-02-15T01:03:13Z")
> [@eschereal](#): > > What _could_ happen: Obama makes a nomination for the seat; the Senate totally stonewalls; the Senate and the WH change hands in the November election; Democratic Senate convenes on January 3rd, approves Obama’s choice, before the new President can be inaugurated on the 20th. > > Not very likely, but possible. If the Senate changes control there is still the issue of the filibuster. Are the Dems going to use the nuclear option with Reid gone? He promised that Supreme Court nominees would still be subject to the filibuster. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/146 "2016-02-15T01:21:16Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > If the Senate changes control there is still the issue of the filibuster. Are the Dems going to use the nuclear option with Reid gone? He promised that Supreme Court nominees would still be subject to the filibuster. I read one column that suggested that Chuck Schumer, who will likely be the next Senate Majority leader if the Democrats take the Senate, should threaten to go full nuclear option if the Republicans fail to confirm the Obama nominee. Let them know up front there will be consequences for obstructionism, and see if they want to roll the dice. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/147 "2016-02-15T01:32:24Z")
> [@astorian](#): > > Nor have the Democrats nominated a justice who turned out to be more conservative than expected (not since Felix Frankfurter). Byron White, nominated by Kennedy comes to mind. And, of course, Republicans like Cruz now even whine about diehard conservatives like Roberts just because they try to stick to a very conservative judicial philosophy occasionally even on cases that don’t lead to the politically-correct conservative ruling (e.g., Obamacare). ---
**Author:** ![Eugene\_of\_Sandwich](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c37758/32.png) [@Eugene\_of\_Sandwich](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eugene_of_Sandwich)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/148 "2016-02-15T01:34:03Z")
Horseshit. Nobody’s going to stand in Obama’s petulant ways. It will never come to a vote that is all. And the glorious dark-skinned president and his ignorant law degreed wife will retire to Hawaii, open up 50 Zaxbys franchises and we’ll be done them. Screw these people. I don’t like like them or respect them. They are my enemies. ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/149 "2016-02-15T01:36:49Z")
If it’s improper for the President to nominate a justice in his last year, what government business IS it proper to perform? Not that conservative lawmakers will answer or be asked that. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/150 "2016-02-15T01:37:14Z")
What’s a Zaxby’s? Is that some kind of white nationalist meme I don’t know? ---
**Author:** ![marshmallow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@marshmallow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/marshmallow)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/151 "2016-02-15T01:37:43Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > And the middle likes moderation and cooperation. What makes you say that? ---
**Author:** ![Leaper](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/4bbf92/32.png) [@Leaper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaper)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/152 "2016-02-15T01:40:58Z")
> [@marshmallow](#): > > What makes you say that? Because if they didn’t, they wouldn’t be “the middle” anymore - they’d be left/right? ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/153 "2016-02-15T02:09:56Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > What’s a Zaxby’s? Is that some kind of white nationalist meme I don’t know? It’s a chicken fast food place in the Southeast. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/154 "2016-02-15T02:15:10Z")
> [@Leaper](#): > > If it’s improper for the President to nominate a justice in his last year, what government business IS it proper to perform? . He can pardon turkeys on Thanksgiving. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/155 "2016-02-15T03:03:19Z")
Senator Grassley’s comment today: “The fact of the matter is that it’s been standard practice over the last 80 years to not confirm Supreme Court nominees during a presidential election year.” Really? “Standard practice” requires something has happened a minimum of once. The Republicans are going to try to push this narrative that Obama nominating someone in his final year is somehow unusual, and their constituents are going to believe it regardless of how demonstrably untrue it is. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/156 "2016-02-15T03:20:09Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Senator Grassley’s comment today: > > “The fact of the matter is that it’s been standard practice over the last 80 years to not confirm Supreme Court nominees during a presidential election year.” > > Really? “Standard practice” requires something has happened a minimum of once. The Republicans are going to try to push this narrative that Obama nominating someone in his final year is somehow unusual, and their constituents are going to believe it regardless of how demonstrably untrue it is. The utter hypocrisy and flagrant lying on this is shown by the fact that [Grassley himself was one of the 97 votes to confirm Reagan appointee Anthony Kennedy in Reagan’s last year in 1988.](http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/269398-senate-judiciary-chair-wait-until-election-is-over-to-fill-scalias) ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/157 "2016-02-15T03:38:55Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > He can pardon turkeys on Thanksgiving. Didn’t they object to his last turkey pardon too? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/158 "2016-02-15T03:41:17Z")
> [@Colibri](#): > > The utter hypocrisy and flagrant lying on this is shown by the fact that [Grassley himself was one of the 97 votes to confirm Reagan appointee Anthony Kennedy in Reagan’s last year in 1988.](http://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/269398-senate-judiciary-chair-wait-until-election-is-over-to-fill-scalias) They should stick to “the president not to nominate SCOTUS justices during an election year”, which would hold true for that instance. Of course, “an election year” is an arbitrary measure since there is nothing significant about Jan 1 in an election cycle. I think one could make the case for presidents not to make significant nominations in the roughly 2 months after an election and before the inauguration, but that’s a different matter. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/159 "2016-02-15T03:55:30Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > They should stick to “the president not to nominate SCOTUS justices during an election year”, which would hold true for that instance. Of course, “an election year” is an arbitrary measure since there is nothing significant about Jan 1 in an election cycle. > > I think one could make the case for presidents not to make significant nominations in the roughly 2 months after an election and before the inauguration, but that’s a different matter. This whole thing–please tell me it’s so transparently fake that nobody except true believers will take it seriously. I mean, manipulating numbers is part of the politics game. But this appears beyond the pale to me. Surely everyone can acknowledge that the president is duty-bound to present nominees, and that the nominees should be decided on their merits, not on some sort of newly-invented tradition about what to do when a justice dies in an election year. Right? ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2016, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061/160 "2016-02-15T04:02:21Z")
I’m willing to wait for President Sanders if it will make the Republicans happy. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-must-be-allowed-to-nominate-the-next-scotus-justice/746061.md?page=9)