If Republicans happen to gain six or more Senate seats in 2014, and with them a Senate majority, it’s very likely they will simply bottle up most judicial nominations in committee, not even allowing floor votes.... That’s after the 2014 elections. In 2016, in addition to another shot at Senate control, Republicans certainly could win back the White House....So... panic mode along with making it really really obvious that Supreme Court Justices are partisan ideologues? Great set-up for the 2014 elections that you're so afraid your side will lose.
२९ नोव्हेंबर, २०१३
At the Washington Post, pressure on Justices Ginsburg and Breyer to retire.
"There’s absolutely no question about it; if they want to secure the principles they have fought for during their careers, the best thing both of these senior liberal justices can do is to retire right now...."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
२२ टिप्पण्या:
(the other kev)
Remember, it's not over until we win.
Your dried husks have been sucked of all the legal reasoning useful to the liberal cause, I'm afraid.
It's the noble thing to do.
At the Supreme Court level, denying otherwise qualified nominees solely because they were nominated by a president from the opposition party is a Democrats' game. Republicans don't play it.
At least not yet. Let them get burned by mendacious Democrats a few more times and maybe they'll start playing it.
Was there ever any evidence that a mediocrity like Sonia Sotomayor was chosen for anything except her political reliability?
Panic to eleventy... NVM, it's been tried already.
...as ObamaCare goes from bad to worse, and another 75 million Americans lose their health insurance (something Demz knew would happen), watch them to genuinely begin to panic. Once they see control of the Senate drop out of sight, wait for them to change the filibuster rule to simple majority for ALL presidential appointments...from SupCt on down as they attempt to stuff all courts with very Liberal appointees.
When in 2015 all of ObamaCare is in effect and the US health care industry tanks, and a total of 100million Americans have lost their health insurance and been forced into Gov't health insurance, we'll see Demz really go from panic into hysteria...this will be the most dangerous phase. This is where the 2nd American Civil War will become a real possibility...Liberals won't want to give up control of the government...and this could be the tipping point...
Just something to consider...
I think the court will look much better after Hillary has eight years to fill the courts with her young ideologues. So Breyer and RBG should just punch the liberal ticket til 2017. No need to panic about 2014.
The author's WP bio:
Jonathan Bernstein is a politicial scientist who contributes to The Plum Line and PostPartisan. He also writes columns for Salon and The American Prospect and posts at his own blog, A Plain Blog About Politics.
He's a "political scientist." Is he a professor? There are two with that name. My Google search finds no details. That's the only way he's identified at multiple places. Hey, I have a BA in PoliSci. Does that mean I'm the same thing? Maybe I should get a gig at the Post. I can thunder about the Supremes.
The Democrat Party is about no principles beyond The Will to Power. There is nothing else that joins the many disparate and desperate attempts to control.
The courts. The bureaucracy. The legislature.
Everything is about power for those who wish to exercise it.
So wait, despite the fierce urgency of scrapping the filibuster, there's actually a short timeframe and small number of judges where the increased power can actually be brought to bear?
And wait, the Republicans could seek revenge by imposing an unofficial moratorium on any confirmations they have the power to block?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqQ99s4Ywnw
Have the Republicans *EVER* bottled up a Supreme Court nominee until the next Presidential election??? Has anyone?
These bizarre paranoid fantasies are really a tremendous window into the minds of the opposition.
" hawkeyedjb said...
Was there ever any evidence that a mediocrity like Sonia Sotomayor was chosen for anything except her political reliability?"
Why do you think the Democrats filibustered Miguel Estrada to keep him off the appeals court ? They wanted a leftist cipher on the court to be the first Hispanic.
I thought the whoe filibuister thing wasn't about packing the courts? now someone wants Ginsburg to retire so that can pack the courts? the circles are making me dizzy
What's the WaPo worried about? The Republican Party is moribund, right? I mean after the last Presidential election where they only got three Hispanic votes, and the government "shutdown" that made everyone hate them and love the Democrats, and the crazy Tea Party racists? The WaPo can't possibly be worried that the moribund Repubs will capture the Senate next year and the White House two years later, can they?
Insert obligatory "Pelican Brief" comment here.
The GOP (aka "The Stupid Party") needs to grow a pair and actually start playing politics - since the Dems ("The Evil Party") have been doing this for decades.
Insert obligatory "Pelican Brief" comment here.
The GOP (aka "The Stupid Party") needs to grow a pair and actually start playing politics - since the Dems ("The Evil Party") have been doing this for decades.
Good grief, all that matters to these people is "winning."
'Thanks for the memories, ya old geezers, now GTFO.'
These bastards would sell off their own grandmothers if it was for the good of the cause.
"clint said...
Have the Republicans *EVER* bottled up a Supreme Court nominee until the next Presidential election??? Has anyone?"
Once -- 1968 when President Johnson wanted to elevate Abe Fortas to be Chief Justice. It was filibustered and the appointment passed to Richard Nixon, who nominated Warren Burger.
Having followed Supreme Court decisions in detail for almost 20 years, none of the justices follow a simple "liberal" or "conservative" ideology. Strangely, the justices are generally willing to consider the law over ideology in decisions (not that ideology doesn't often show in decisions).
Please, let's be honest here:
"making it really really obvious that Supreme Court Justices are partisan ideologues"
No, making really obvious that, TO THE LEFT, Supreme Court Justices are nothing but partisan ideologues, and that their view of the "Justices" who rule the way that the left likes is that those "Justices" rule that way because of political ideology, not because of anything in the Constitution.
clint said...
Have the Republicans *EVER* bottled up a Supreme Court nominee until the next Presidential election??? Has anyone?
No, the Democrats are right to be fearful. Because after the way they went nuclear, they can be pretty damn sure that once the Republicans take back the Senate, not one single Obama nominee will be confirmed to any position, and the Senate will remain in pro-forma session, so he will not get to make a single recess appointment, either.
Actions have consequences.
Justice Stevens set the standard for not worrying overmuch about one's replacement. He might have retired in 1999 at the ripe old age of 79, but instead he stayed on through 8 years of Bush. Meanwhile, Justice O'Connor retired at 75 and 7 healthy years later I have little doubt she has some regrets doing so. I personally think justices should emulate Justice Souter, moving on before hitting two decades, and should try to avoid dying of old age in office, Like Chief Justice Rehnquist, but that does not appear to be a widely held belief among justices. Credit Justice Marshall for not trying to stay in office through the presidency of George H.W. Bush (dying weeks after he left office), even if it meant being replaced by a Republican (Thomas).
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा