# 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:** 9
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [March 16, 2016, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/161 "2016-03-16T23:51:06Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > That would solve the problem. But you mean “smother him with a pillow” don’t you? 😃 Frankly, at this point any means will do. Poison, shotgun, knife wounds. Everything is on the table. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/162 "2016-03-17T00:12:38Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > All those Republicans in tight Senate races are thinking how best to strangle McConnell in his sleep. No need, just flip him on his back and let him die of thirst. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/163 "2016-03-17T00:17:35Z")
I respect the people’s choice to give adaher nightmares if they want, since the people’s desires clearly override all constitutional concerns these days, apparently. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/164 "2016-03-17T00:22:56Z")
Drown him in a bathtub, maybe? ---
**Author:** ![Ukulele\_Ike](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/df788c/32.png) [@Ukulele\_Ike](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ukulele_Ike)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/165 "2016-03-17T00:33:44Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Think of him more as a Steward than a president. He’s holding the place until the real president is elected in the fall. Valet, maybe. Pullman porter? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/166 "2016-03-17T00:44:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If I were a senator, I would vote to confirm. Jebus, Bricker. You are one of the board’s resident conservatives, but you have taken many, many non-conservative positions. Why would you confirm a moderate/leftist to replace Scalia? I understand that the Court is supposed to be above politics, but Obergefell, Kennedy v. Louisiana, Casey, Lawrence, have blown that facade out of the water. We need strict constructionists in these positions or else rule by the people will be no longer: we just submit our proposals to nine lawyers. ---
**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:** [March 17, 2016, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/167 "2016-03-17T00:45:51Z")
What’s a “moderate/leftist”? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/168 "2016-03-17T00:45:59Z")
So, it looks like **Bricker** , **adaher** , and **astorian** have all said that if they were Senators, they would vote to confirm. I’m guessing that all three of you voted for Republican senators. Are the senators you voted for willing to confirm him? And if not, does that affect your likelihood of voting to re-elect those senators? Or, if despite your votes your senators are Democrats, would you consider a hypothetical future challenger’s decision in a case like this to have any bearing on your vote for them? EDIT: > [@](#): > > Jebus, Bricker. You are one of the board’s resident conservatives, but you have taken many, many non-conservative positions. Why would you confirm a moderate/leftist to replace Scalia? Not to speak for **Bricker** , but the way our system works is that the President nominates justices, and it’s to be expected that a President will nominate them from his or her own side of the aisle. Given that, when the President is from the other party, a moderate is the best you can realistically hope for. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/169 "2016-03-17T00:46:12Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Gun owners and 2nd Amendment supporters unite. We must keep pressure on our duly elected representatives to prevent a judge like Merrick B. Garland from being appointed to the SCOTUS. Of course, no hearing is constitutionally required for Garland’s appointment. > > Garland is an anti-2nd Amendment judge. Therefore, I don’t consider him to be qualified for the Supremes. The Bill of (Individual) Rights is a very important part of the U.S. Constitution and I expect Justices to uphold the U.S. Constitution, not rewrite it in their own image or to support their chosen political party. > > \*Back in 2007, Judge Garland voted to undo a D.C. Circuit court decision striking down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. The liberal District of Columbia government had passed a ban on individual handgun possession, which even prohibited guns kept in one’s own house for self-defense. > > Snip > > Garland thought all of these regulations were legal, which tells us two things. First, it tells us that he has a very liberal view of gun rights, since he apparently wanted to undo a key court victory protecting them. Second, it tells us that he’s willing to uphold executive actions that violate the rights of gun owners.\* > > [The 'Moderates' Are Not So Moderate: Merrick Garland | National Review](http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/432716/moderates-are-not-so-moderate-merrick-garland) > Garland choses to ignore the will of Congress, and the people, when he judged that Congress didn’t know what it was talking about when Congress made it clear that firearm owner registrations would not be kept by the FBI. > > \*In 1993, Congress enacted the “Brady Bill,” while providing that the Brady waiting period would sunset in five years, to be replaced with the National Instant Check System (NICS) for all retail gun purchases. Although prior law and the 1993 law both forbade the federal government from using the NICS to register gun owners, Janet Reno and the FBI immediately began using the NICS for gun registration. > > snip > > Dissenting Judge David B. Sentelle, a Reagan appointee, opined that Congress was perfectly clear when stating it wanted the NICS records destroyed – and destroyed immediately, not six months later. “The Attorney General [Janet Reno]'s position,” Sentelle wrote, “strikes me as reminiscent of a petulant child pulling her sister’s hair. Her mother tells her, ‘Don’t pull the baby’s hair.’ The child says, ‘All right, Mama,’ but again pulls the infant’s hair. Her defense is, ‘Mama, you didn’t say I had to stop right now.’”\* > > [http://www.davekopel.com/NRO/2000/Instant-Check-Permanent-Record.htm](http://www.davekopel.com/NRO/2000/Instant-Check-Permanent-Record.htm) Doorhinge, that’s way too much for a quote. Don’t violate other site’s copyright, please. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/170 "2016-03-17T00:51:13Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > What’s a “moderate/leftist”? One who insists on trying the capitalists before shooting them. ---
**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, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/171 "2016-03-17T01:00:28Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Jebus, Bricker. You are one of the board’s resident conservatives, but you have taken many, many non-conservative positions. Why would you confirm a moderate/leftist to replace Scalia? > > I understand that the Court is supposed to be above politics, but Obergefell, Kennedy v. Louisiana, Casey, Lawrence, have blown that facade out of the water. We need strict constructionists in these positions or else rule by the people will be no longer: we just submit our proposals to nine lawyers. So what is your plan of action should the people decide to have Hilary Clinton as POTUS for the next 8 years? Just keep stalling and refusing to even hold hearings on any of her Supreme Court nominees? And what if the people think “fuck this shit, let’s have a functional government”, and elect a majority Democrat senate? What then? Do you propose to have an armed takeover of a Federal Bird Sanctuary until you get your way? ---
**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:** [March 17, 2016, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/172 "2016-03-17T01:25:28Z")
I still would have preferred Akhil Reed Amar. But Garland is a good, and under circumstances other than these, a non-controversial pick, who would probably make a good Justice. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/173 "2016-03-17T01:25:28Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Do not give me nightmares. As much as I dislike Hillary Clinton, I will be doing a happy dance if Obama hands over the reins of power to her. Since your own party’s nominee will be Trump, you’ll be voting for Clinton? Good to hear it. I’m sure you’ll be in extremely numerous company. ---
**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:** [March 17, 2016, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/174 "2016-03-17T01:30:35Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > I still would have preferred Akhil Reed Amar. But Garland is a good, and under circumstances other than these, a non-controversial pick, who would probably make a good Justice. Oh good, this gives me the chance to tell my Amar anecdotes: [ul] [li]As of ten years ago, he still listed his high school GPA on his CV[/li][li]Supposedly, when he interviewed for a SCOTUS clerkship, the justice told him, “I’ve had clerks who thought they were smarter than me, and I’ve had clerks who were smarter than me, but I’ve never had one tell me they were smarter than me _in the interview_.”[/li][li]He went on a profanity-laden tirade against a classmate who accidentally suggested that Jefferson was involved in the constitutional convention[/li][li]He lowered another classmate’s grade, well after the grading cutoff, after she submitted a negative teacher evaluation[/li][/ul] He’s a weird dude. Obviously brilliant, but bad with humans. ---
**Author:** ![oft\_wears\_hats](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7993a0/32.png) [@oft\_wears\_hats](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/oft_wears_hats)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/175 "2016-03-17T02:05:57Z")
I was hoping for Srinivasan, but [this article](http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-03-16/merrick-garland-s-supreme-court-nomination-is-a-smart-bet) by my close personal friend\* Noah Feldman raises some excellent points. Especially regarding how Garland’s age acts as an advantage. [QUOTE=My close personal friend\*, Noah Feldman] For Garland, too, age is an explanation of why he’d agree to be nominated. Every appellate judge dreams of being on the Supreme Court someday, and Garland is certainly no exception. A younger judge might have to consider the risk of becoming a sacrificial nominee. Not so Garland, for whom this is the last chance. If Garland has bad luck and isn’t confirmed, he can happily remain on the D.C. Circuit, secure in the knowledge that his country honored him with the nomination. The nomination is a net plus for him, however it goes. [/QUOTE] \*We were at the same dinner once; we spoke for a few minutes and he didn’t tell me to get the fuck away from him. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/176 "2016-03-17T02:13:54Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > … His popularity is definitely on the upswing though, at 49%, so he’s getting closer to the point where opposing him could actually have consequences. … And at 52% and +7 spread (Gallup), which is where he is right now, even more so. Is he assured of staying up there or going higher? No. But this kind of battle with the GOP is the best way to guarantee it! They are put themselves into a no win position. Even the cute out of trying to approve only after Clinton wins is blocked. At that point his name is withdrawn pending Clinton’s inauguration. (And I suspect that that possibility has already been discussed and will, quietly be made clear to GOP leadership). He is by far the best deal they could get, fairly moderate, well qualified, and relatively likely more time limited, not likely three decades. But this deal does have an expiration date. ---
**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:** [March 17, 2016, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/177 "2016-03-17T02:21:48Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > But this deal does have an expiration date. I’ll be pretty surprised if he pulls Garland after a Clinton win. For better or worse, he just has never really played political hardball like that. Moreover, the GOP is probably still gonna have enough seats to filibuster. Do you think Clinton wants to start her presidency with a fight over killing the filibuster? I doubt it. I’ll bet Clinton and Obama would both be happy to take Garland and lay the groundwork for Clinton’s other eventual nominees. ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/178 "2016-03-17T02:29:29Z")
I can just see it: Clinton elected, Obama withdraws this nomination, and Clinton nominates whomever. They then accuse her of subverting the constitution by not respecting the nomination of the man that was duly elected at the time of the vacancy. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/179 "2016-03-17T02:33:59Z")
And they [_may_ already be backing down](http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/grassley-to-meet-with-garland), realizing that backing down now is their least poor option. > [@](#): > > Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) will meet with newly named Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland after the Senate returns from its upcoming recess, according to the White House. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2016, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160/180 "2016-03-17T02:42:59Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Since your own party’s nominee will be Trump, you’ll be voting for Clinton? > > Good to hear it. I’m sure you’ll be in extremely numerous company. Haven’t you heard? Gary Johnson is the LP candidate. He’ll be the best qualified candidate on the ballot resume-wise. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-nominates-judge-merrick-garland-to-the-scotus/749160.md?page=10)