# Schumer Urges Filibuster to Block Gorsuch Confirmation
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [March 23, 2017, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845 "2017-03-23T16:45:20Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 21
### Author:  [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/401 "2017-04-03T22:47:49Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> IThe Dem base is going to eat Manchin, Heitkamp, and Donnelly alive for supporting Gorsuch, and probably kill any chance they had of retaking the Senate in 2018 in the process, but I won’t complain. I’ll just sit back and smile.
I would be semi-pleased if those Senators were primaried, as the Republicans would probably pick up those seats. (The Democrats have very little chance of picking up the Senate in 2018 any, but every extra seat helps.) OTOH, the rest of the Democrats would be pushed to the left in reaction.
I don’t know if it would happen. Depends on how much of a Democratic base there is in those states. Not much, is my sense. The problems the TP caused for the Republicans were largely from primarying elected officials or electable candidates in purple or blue states, e.g. DE, NV, CO. You won’t see the TP going after Collins, for example.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/402 "2017-04-03T22:48:45Z")
> [@bobot](#):
>
> I appreciate your not disputing my assertation that the Republicans in congress are childish obstructionists.
They’re about to approvingly vote someone on to the Supreme Court, aren’t they? That seems like the opposite of obstructionist..
---
### Author:  [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 10:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/403 "2017-04-03T22:54:26Z")
That’s kind of like a prisoner strutting around the yard claiming “How can you call me a murderer? I haven’t killed anybody today!”
---
### Author:  [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambrosio_Spinola)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/404 "2017-04-03T22:56:21Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> It’s a pretty bizarre perspective for me too, but it is exactly what the rank-and-file Democrats want. The Dem base is going to eat Manchin, Heitkamp, and Donnelly alive for supporting Gorsuch, and probably kill any chance they had of retaking the Senate in 2018 in the process, but I won’t complain. I’ll just sit back and smile.
Eh, those Freedom Caucus guys have done their fair share of meaningless votes (in my opinion anyway) and it seems to fire up their base. I don’t think it’s necessarily a victory of any practical kind, but I think as a messaging statement it works now. There’s a bunch of angry pissed liberals out there right now, and saying “I voted against Trump’s nominee! #resist!” plays better than “We went ahead and voted for Gorsuch _this time_ because this way we preserved a hard to describe procedural rule which might possibly allow us to block a different nominee at a future time, assuming that Mitch McConnell will allow us to without using the nuclear option then, as we totally trust them to not screw us in order to replace a liberal vote on the Court should one occur, we have no leverage to actually enforce this deal thank you, we are the adults in the room please vote Democratic.”
It’s probably in the abstract bad for the filibuster to die, but it seems pretty illusory at the moment anyway, so it doesn’t seem like a big loss to me. It’s possible that either option will screw over red state Dem Senators, they’ll have to make their own choices on it.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/405 "2017-04-03T23:03:26Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> It’s a pretty bizarre perspective for me too, but it is exactly what the rank-and-file Democrats want. The Dem base is going to eat Manchin, Heitkamp, and Donnelly alive for supporting Gorsuch, and probably kill any chance they had of retaking the Senate in 2018 in the process, but I won’t complain. I’ll just sit back and smile.
The only chance the party has is for Democrats to be energized and motivated. 2010 is what happens when Democratic senators and congress folks get scared and run to the middle.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/406 "2017-04-03T23:05:37Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> They were out of power for the Garland ‘fight’. Their actions were irrelevant. I suppose they could have suggested that Obama “change the nominee” like Schumer so helpfully did for Trump, but it probably would have mattered just as much as if Trump were to change the nominee today (which is to say: ‘not at all’). Republicans wouldn’t have held a vote for anyone on Obama’s shortlist and Democrats seem to be ready to filibuster anyone on Trump’s shortlist.
>
> The “they would have acted … differently” in my post was a reference to Reid’s 2013 decision to go nuclear more than anything they did or didn’t do in 2016 with Garland. Reid and the 2013 Senate Democrats made McConnell’s decision to go nuclear a fairly easy one.
>
> Does that answer your question?
I was discussing Garland and Gorsuch, which is what you responded to. But okay.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/407 "2017-04-03T23:08:31Z")
If the country doesn’t manage to de-escalate these SCOTUS fights, someone is going to shoot a justice.
---
### Author:  [@The\_Other\_Waldo\_Pepper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Other_Waldo_Pepper)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/408 "2017-04-03T23:08:52Z")
> [@bobot](#):
>
> That’s kind of like a prisoner strutting around the yard claiming “How can you call me a murderer? I haven’t killed anybody today!”
So – sometimes they’re doing what they can to stop developments they don’t like, and sometimes they’re doing what they can to help along developments they do like? Isn’t that kind of like [del]a prisoner[/del] pretty much _everybody?_
---
### Author:  [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/409 "2017-04-03T23:14:32Z")
> [@Okrahoma](#):
>
> Can you point out when was the last time 41 senators voted against cloture on a Supreme Court Justice confirmation? I mean, it’s “often used” - you should be able to find an instance, no?
The cloture rule - or colloquially, today’s filibuster - is an often used procedure. There are no hoops to jump through to employ it. There is no need to tilt your head sideways and squint just right to find a precedent for calling for a filibuster. Unlike, say, some bullshit rule about your not allowed to nominate for SCOTUS in the last year of your presidency.
---
### Author:  [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/410 "2017-04-03T23:15:19Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> If the country doesn’t manage to de-escalate these SCOTUS fights, someone is going to shoot a justice.
You keep bringing this up. Do you know something the rest of us don’t?
---
### Author:  [@Okrahoma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Okrahoma)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/411 "2017-04-03T23:40:59Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#):
>
> The cloture rule - or colloquially, today’s filibuster - is an often used procedure. There are no hoops to jump through to employ it. There is no need to tilt your head sideways and squint just right to find a precedent for calling for a filibuster. Unlike, say, some bullshit rule about your not allowed to nominate for SCOTUS in the last year of your presidency.
So in other words cannot find a precedent for successfully filibustering a Supreme Court nominee.
---
### Author:  [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)
#### Post date: [April 3, 2017, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/412 "2017-04-03T23:47:38Z")
No. I said the Democrats are employing the well worn rules (whether employed on a Supreme Court Justice or not (which I never claimed) don’t matter a whit), where the Republicans had to make up a reason to avoid the rules altogether and just not even hold hearings.
---
### Author:  [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/413 "2017-04-04T00:22:21Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> the adults in the room (Republicans)
😃 😃 😃
Dude, the Republicans lost their claim on being the adults in the room when Gee Dubya decided he was going to play Risk in the Middle East. And they doubled down on that by gutting FEMA and putting people like Chertoff and Heckuva Job Brownie in charge. Then doing nothing but singing “I’m Against It” for eight years while Obama was the adult in the room. And finally, nominating a lazy ignoramus for President, and falling in behind him and supporting him, rather than gutting his nomination.
Kids graduating from high school this year don’t remember the Republicans ever being the adults in the room. Think on that.
---
### Author:  [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/414 "2017-04-04T00:42:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#):
>
> You keep bringing this up. Do you know something the rest of us don’t?
Thankfully, no. Hopefully I’m wrong.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/415 "2017-04-04T00:44:47Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#):
>
> No. I said the Democrats are employing the well worn rules (whether employed on a Supreme Court Justice or not (which I never claimed) don’t matter a whit), where the Republicans had to make up a reason to avoid the rules altogether and just not even hold hearings.
I can see the future:
ME: What rule or rules did they avoid that mandate a hearing?
JACK: Doesn’t matter, that’s not the point, they just suck. Don’t trick me with Ye Olde Law Bookf.
---
### Author:  [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/416 "2017-04-04T00:51:59Z")
I can see the past: The Republicans voted on Obama’s nominee? Ha ha, of course they fucking didn’t. Because they’re… grownups. Or something.
---
### Author:  [@DinoR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DinoR)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/417 "2017-04-04T01:19:13Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#):
>
> To me, this sounds like me slapping you, you slapping me back, me slapping you again, and then you burning down my house. It’s reasonable to characterize these actions as quite different.
To me, while Bricker used it the history for a more specific purpose, I read a lot of it being like two siblings caught fighting by their parents. There’s screeching about “who started it” and who did the worse thing in the lead up to the fight. Both are appealing to the electorate like they are the parent deciding who’s to blame/punish. I lean towards “both of you go to your rooms till you can learn to behave” on the state of politicizing SCOTUS nominations. Practically that’s not an option.
When I am King maybe I will do that in the window before I feel obligated to depose myself. 😃
> [@](#):
>
> Since we’ll never agree on this, we need a way to de-escalate, like the age limit I’ve suggested,
I like the age limit piece. I lean towards either much longer or no term limits in that amendment though. I really dislike the idea of judges potentially facing a decision on the career implications when considering a case. What exactly is the career path for a former Supreme who has to leave? Even stepping back to a lower federal court requires a confirmation vote. Will they be sitting in a County Courthouse hearing drunk driving cases? It seems wasteful. It also seems like it would exclude some great potential SCOTUS justices who will stay in lower court positions for career/financial reasons. There’s definitely room to work on the overall idea.
---
### Author:  [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/418 "2017-04-04T01:22:57Z")
> [@bobot](#):
>
> I can see the past: The Republicans voted on Obama’s nominee? Ha ha, of course they fucking didn’t. Because they’re.. grownups. Or something.
Why, specifically, is rejecting a qualified nominee by voting after being sure the vote will go the way you want it so dramatically better than simply not voting?
Specifically.
---
### Author:  [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/419 "2017-04-04T01:25:31Z")
I saw an amusing poster, today:
We must not confirm Gorsuch because we have the precedent that we cannot confirm a judge put forth by a president in his last year in office.
---
### Author:  [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2017, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845/420 "2017-04-04T01:32:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Why, specifically, is rejecting a qualified nominee by voting after being sure the vote will go the way you want it so dramatically better than simply not voting?
>
> Specifically.
I thought the objection was that Garland was a moderate pick (Hatch approved) who was rejected as a naked exercise of power so utterly untethered to qualifications that they didn’t even bother to provide the fig leaf of a hearing.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845.md?page=20)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/schumer-urges-filibuster-to-block-gorsuch-confirmation/782845.md?page=22)