Both Portman and Toomey (from next door Pennsylvania, and also up for re-election this year) have said that the next President should get to make the nomination. Whether they stick with this stance is still open, but if they do. . . well, we’ll see.
Plus we always knew Obama was a typical politician, and his “regret” at his 2006 actions with Alito do not actually help his case:
That’s a bit much. The GOP’s numbers took a huge hit over the government shutdown. Half of the public might disapprove of Obama, but far more than half get pissed when the GOP stonewall him completely.
Voicing opposition during a confirmation is indeed typical politics. Do you think refusing to begin confirmation hearings would be typical politics? I know you are the side of them proceeding when he nominates, but would you excuse it as "typical politics " if they don’t?
The shutdown was a bridge too far, and this might prove to be as well. But normal opposition tactics actually help the Republicans with voters, which wasn’t the case with Clinton, Reagan, or even the two Bushes. Obama’s ability to go to the people to rally support or opposition has been probably the worst of any President despite his oratorical skills.
I really don’t understand the mentality which thinks a filibuster of a potential justice is anywhere *near *the same thing as a blanket refusal to even consider a candidate.
It’s not, of course, but if the GOP just happens to not approve anyone, it would be doing what Obama and Schumer would have done.
It is sometimes said you can sue anyone for anything… not getting your case tossed out and winning are entirely different matters.
The courts would almost certainly reject jurisdiction to hear such a claim as it is a political question, best left to the other branches to work out. And failing the other branches working it out, the voters have a say at the ballot box and can vote out the party or parties they feel are problematic.
Aah, but remember he’s a typical politician. As mentioned in the article you quoted, some party members are set free to oppose a nominee because they know they will still allow the confirmation to proceed. So maybe Obama and Shumer had no real thought of stopping it.
I would put to you that it isn’t a political question. If the court fails to hear it and frankly if it fails to say Senate has a duty to vote on nominations, it is allowing the Senate the option of killing off a branch of government - without even being on record for doing so.
I’ve seen a great many that were thoughtful but not respectful, which is far more appropriate.
The remedy would be what? The court orders the Senate to hold a hearing and/or a vote? That runs afoul of Article I, Section 5, Clause 2 of the Constitution which grants each house of Congress the power to set its own rules.
Court wouldn’t touch that with a ten foot pole.
It was the Republicans. Before Scalia’s corpse was cold, and I mean actually on the same day he died, Cruz and McConnell announced they would block any Obama nominee.
And as per your wiki link a political question is one in which “no Constitutional duties is involved”. But it is in the Constitution. The President shall nominate a Supreme Court judge with the advice and consent of the Senate.
Eta: I don’t know what the remedy would be. Something vague like “Give advice and consent in a timely fashion”.
What exactly would be elements of such a skillset, other than not being Obama?
More like “missing the point” at its worst.
There are polls which cite that approximately 25% of people asked blame Obama for Katrina. Nuff Said.
Mods, please move this thread to the Pit.
Here’s-a you decodah ring, but you canna read it witout de code book. Ice cream! Tutsi-frutsi ice cream!
Maybe something like, “Given that total inaction on a Supreme Court nominee is an unconstitutional infringement on the operations of both the judicial and executive branches of government, if no action is taken within thirty days of a nomination, it shall be considered that the Senate has no meaningful advice to give and its consent has been implied by its lack of opposition. Therefore, the nominee shall immediately join the Court without further delay.”