# Obama nominates Judge Merrick Garland to the SCOTUS. **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 16, 2016, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160 "2016-03-16T14:13:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/261 "2016-03-17T19:06:58Z")
> [@rooostra](#): > > Conservative justice A. Raymond Randolph (George HW Bush appointee, speaker to the Heritage Foundation and the JCN) also voted to rehear the case en banc, in addition to two other judges. > > Is that evidence that Randolph supports an anti-Second Amendment position? It could be. Has A. Raymond Randolph been nominated for the Supremes? Is an in-depth discussion of Randolph’s previous rulings required to decide if Garland should be confirmed? Are people tired of hearing Garland’s name? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/262 "2016-03-17T19:13:07Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > …My question is who speaks for the senate and how is such a decision made for the senate by one man? The Majority leader can just speak for all of them? (post shortened) The Senate Majority Leader is elected to the position. Anyone who is elected can be unelected. All you need is a majority. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/263 "2016-03-17T19:20:23Z")
> [@Lightnin](#): > > Have you noticed how much of the GOP’s strategy of late appears to be to do anything to avoid doing their jobs? Why do you keep defending this strategy? Identifying factual errors in criticism of a given strategy is not the same as defending the strategy. Did you think it was? ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/264 "2016-03-17T19:35:04Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > (post shortened) > > The Senate Majority Leader is elected to the position. Anyone who is elected can be unelected. All you need is a majority. When’s the next election? ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/265 "2016-03-17T19:36:51Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > The problem with that is the Constitution doesn’t ask for Mitch McConnell’s advice and consent. Mitch is trying to block the Senate as a whole or even at committee level from advising. Yeah, but as other folk have mentioned, both houses of Congress have adopted all kinds of rules and traditions which allow few people outsized influence - none of which is spelled out in the Const. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/266 "2016-03-17T19:37:19Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > When’s the next election? When U.S. Senator **CarnalK** calls for one. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/267 "2016-03-17T19:47:59Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > When U.S. Senator **CarnalK** calls for one. 🙂 Sorry, you’re the one who’s always saying “them’s the rules” so I figured you’d know. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/268 "2016-03-17T19:59:20Z")
> [@Johnny\_Ace](#): > > Remind me, who was it that put Obama into office? The Republican policy seems to be that Obama is merely a placeholder, and has never actually held the office of President of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![kenobi\_65](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kenobi_65/32/13178_2.png) [@kenobi\_65](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kenobi_65)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/269 "2016-03-17T19:59:56Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > The Senate Majority Leader is elected to the position. Anyone who is elected can be unelected. All you need is a majority. Though, he wasn’t elected to his position by the voters; he was elected to it by his fellow Republican senators. A grand total of 54 people were involved in that election. To steal McConnell’s own words: > [@](#): > > The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let’s give them a voice. Let’s let the American people decide. Why aren’t the American people allowed to have a voice in who leads the majority in the U.S. Senate, Senator? (Yes, I’m being facetious. Mostly.) ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/270 "2016-03-17T20:06:42Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > When’s the next election? I expect Charles Schumer will be elected in late November. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/271 "2016-03-17T20:20:41Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Identifying factual errors in criticism of a given strategy is not the same as defending the strategy. Did you think it was? Sorry, I’m not seeing the distinction. What “factual errors” are you talking about? And by “factual”, I mean “not personal opinion in support of a political goal”. ---
**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:** [March 17, 2016, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/272 "2016-03-17T20:29:38Z")
> [@Peremensoe](#): > > I expect Charles Schumer will be elected in late November. :dubious: Not even the most ambitious Democrats in Congress would expect a changeover in leadership to the opposing party prior to the seating of the new Congress on January 3, 2017. A lot of what is being rehashed in this thread was well gone over in a couple threads after the death of Scalia. 1.Yes the Senate can refuse to vote. Most Dopers seem to think they should schedule a vote, but they are not Constitutionally required to do so. 1. The Senate refusing to vote is not unprecedented. It’s been a long time, but the Senate has refused a vote on a SCOTUS nominee before. 2. The whole Advice and Consent process was pulled from the Massachusetts state constitution of 1780. In MA the procedure was for the governor to make a nomination and nominee be appointed only after Advice and Consent of the Privy Council. If the Privy Council did not want the nominee appointed then their practice was to not take a formal vote at all on the nominee. 3. Obama cannot make a recess appointment unless the Senate says it is in recess. In other words, the Republicans would have to take action to let Obama make such an appointment. See NLRB v Canning ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/273 "2016-03-17T21:16:16Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That wouldn’t explain Kagan and Sotomayor. Wasn’t the Dems in charge of the Senate at that time? I don’t remember, I seem to recall it was Harry Reid calling the shots. In that case, its easier to beat back a tiring filibuster than it is to get the majority leader of the opposition party to acquiesce on a hearing ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/274 "2016-03-17T21:34:06Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > This is ridiculous! The recess appointment is not a remedy in reality or original intent. And Obama tried to sneak in some “recess appointments” that got overturned when the Senate said they weren’t legally in recess, so that kind throws out the canny and gentleman stuff. In reality? No, due to the Supreme Court ruling you gave, who decided to accept the procedural fiction that the Senate was still in session. In original intent? Hell yes it was. The whole point is to make sure the position doesn’t get left open forever because the Senate doesn’t vote on it. It was a way to force them to have to vote on it, or get someone appointed. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/275 "2016-03-17T21:37:54Z")
> [@Lightnin](#): > > Sorry, I’m not seeing the distinction. Try this: **Person A** : You have to register to vote because the law requires it. **Person B** : There is no law that says you must register to vote. **Person A** : Why are you supporting not registering to vote? \*\* Person B\*\* can support registering to vote while simultaneously identifying the factual error that a person is required to vote. Is that distinction more clear? > [@](#): > > What “factual errors” are you talking about? And by “factual”, I mean “not personal opinion in support of a political goal”. It’s in post #222: > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m assuming the spirit of the Constitution (and the obvious implications of language with regards to the words “advice” and “consent”), along with tradition and practice, clearly demonstrate **this** , but I’ll wait for legal expert input. The “this” bolded above refers to whether the Senate “must advise and consent”. The assumption is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/276 "2016-03-17T21:40:10Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Identifying factual errors in criticism of a given strategy is not the same as defending the strategy. Did you think it was? No, but when you argue against one side, the default is to assume you support the other side, unless you say otherwise. That’s why people include those disclaimers. For example, “I’d never vote for Trump in a million years, but I have to say he’s right about Planned Parenthood.” ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/277 "2016-03-17T21:47:57Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > I > In original intent? Hell yes it was. The whole point is to make sure the position doesn’t get left open forever because the Senate doesn’t vote on it. It was a way to force them to have to vote on it, or get someone appointed. Who says? Istm recess appointments were so important jobs could be temporarily filled while the Senators were travelling by horseback to the constituencies. ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/278 "2016-03-17T21:55:40Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Is that distinction more clear? Sure. I think it’s kind of a pointless argument to make in a thread like this, but sure. ---
**Author:** ![Peremensoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ce7236/32.png) [@Peremensoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peremensoe)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/279 "2016-03-17T23:58:06Z")
> [@Iggy](#): > > :dubious: Not even the most ambitious Democrats in Congress would expect a changeover in leadership to the opposing party prior to the seating of the new Congress on January 3, 2017. The actual Majority position couldn’t be assumed until the new Congress, but the ascendant party can certainly _choose_ their leader, to step into that role, in the weeks following the election. As the Republicans did for Mitch McConnell in November 2014. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2016, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/280 "2016-03-18T02:33:39Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > This is ridiculous! The recess appointment is not a remedy in reality or original intent. And Obama tried to sneak in some “recess appointments” that got overturned when the Senate said they weren’t legally in recess, so that kind throws out the canny and gentleman stuff. Then there is no remedy. Tell me how he isn’t being both canny and a gentleman in this. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160.md?page=15)