• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Recess appointment of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court?

Recess appointment of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court?

  • Yes

    Votes: 26 68.4%

  • No

    Votes: 12 31.6%
  • Total voters
    38
sunmaster14 said:
I'm endlessly fascinated by the Democrats' apparent belief that Republicans are more ruthless than Democrats are. I think the reverse is obviously true. And there is good reason for it. Democrats substitute political ideology for religion, and so their partisan fervor is greater. I suppose it is part of being ruthless to accuse your opponents of being ruthless while being far more ruthless yourself.

Already, the Democrats are declaring war on the President-Elect. The Senate minority leader is already committing himself to slow-walking Trump's cabinet appointments and trying to obstruct him anyway he can. The Republicans didn't do this to Obama. Never did actually, despite Democrats' insincere (or perhaps delusional) claims to the contrary.
Click to expand...

As a third party, my perception is that Republicans tend to be more ruthless.
 
BobTheCoward said:
As a third party, my perception is that Republicans tend to be more ruthless.
Click to expand...

We have no doubt of that, that is usually what the left believes. Passing Obamacare by changing the rules and voting in the middle of the night might be a clue?
 
logger said:
We have no doubt of that, that is usually what the left believes. Passing Obamacare by changing the rules and voting in the middle of the night might be a clue?
Click to expand...

I'm neither on the left nor support Obamacare. I'm probably to the right of you on healthcare.
 
Dumb All Over said:
The moment has come and gone. The window of opportunity has closed shut.

Barack Hussein Obama officially has no balls.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of cases where I think Obama has taken the cowardly path. But this isn't one of them. This is just basic prudence.

Even aside from how the public might feel, it would be a losing move. A recess appointment of Garland is something that the Republican congress could end in very short order through procedural moves (basically, adjourn and reconvene immediately). So the appointment would gain very, very little. But it would cost something considerable: Garland's seat on the DC Circuit court. If Garland went to the Supreme Court, even for a day, he loses the DC Circuit seat he currently holds. He wouldn't get that seat back once his recess appointment is over. Trump would get to pick Garland's replacement on the DC Circuit court.

So Obama would give up a permanent seat on the DC Circuit court in exchange for a very temporary (as in, maybe not past January 20, 2017) Supreme Court seat. That's not actually a good bargain. That was never a good bargain. The window of opportunity hasn't closed, it was never a real opportunity to begin with.
 
Hercules56 said:
A case could be made that the GOP's refusal to give Garland hearings violated the Constitution.
Click to expand...

“Some will criticize such a decision and say that it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention,” Mr. Biden said at the time. “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.

“That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me,” he added, “we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”
Joe Biden, 1992

Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
“Some will criticize such a decision and say that it was nothing more than an attempt to save a seat on the court in hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention,” Mr. Biden said at the time. “It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.

“That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me,” he added, “we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”
Joe Biden, 1992

Chris B.
Click to expand...

Did the Democrats give the nominee a hearing and a vote?

Yep.
 
sunmaster14 said:
I'm endlessly fascinated by the Democrats' apparent belief that Republicans are more ruthless than Democrats are.
Click to expand...

When is the last time the Democrats in Congress made it their primary agenda to defeat the President in the election four years away?

When did they ever filibuster every single bill proposed by the President?

When did they ever refuse to give any nominee to the Supreme Court a hearing and a vote during the GOP President's last year in office?

The Republicans' obstructionism has reached a new level, bordering on treason.
 
phiwum said:
Sorry, but are you calling your own side the scorpion?
Click to expand...

Enh. It's not really a fair metaphor. Obama campaigned on a lot of empty promises, but I don't think being The One to actually usher in a new era of bipartisan cooperation was actually one of them.

And no, I'm not calling "my own side" the scorpion. I don't think the GOP is any more on my side than the DNC is. They're pretty much *all* scorpions, as far as I can tell.
 
Ziggurat said:
There are plenty of cases where I think Obama has taken the cowardly path. But this isn't one of them. This is just basic prudence.

Even aside from how the public might feel, it would be a losing move. A recess appointment of Garland is something that the Republican congress could end in very short order through procedural moves (basically, adjourn and reconvene immediately). So the appointment would gain very, very little. But it would cost something considerable: Garland's seat on the DC Circuit court. If Garland went to the Supreme Court, even for a day, he loses the DC Circuit seat he currently holds. He wouldn't get that seat back once his recess appointment is over. Trump would get to pick Garland's replacement on the DC Circuit court.

So Obama would give up a permanent seat on the DC Circuit court in exchange for a very temporary (as in, maybe not past January 20, 2017) Supreme Court seat. That's not actually a good bargain. That was never a good bargain. The window of opportunity hasn't closed, it was never a real opportunity to begin with.
Click to expand...
I wholeheartedly agree.

I was offering my answer to the only question that remained:
Hercules56 said:
The only question that remains if Obama has the balls to do it.
Click to expand...
Question answered.
 
Hercules56 said:
Did the Democrats give the nominee a hearing and a vote?

Yep.
Click to expand...

Umm, for the record,

Clarence Thomas was the last HW Bush appointee.

"Thomas was confirmed by the United States Senate on October 15, 1991, in a 52–48 vote.[8]

Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg (born Joan Ruth Bader; March 15, 1933)[2]:3 is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Ginsburg was appointed by President Bill Clinton and took the oath of office on August 10, 1993"

From Wiki
Chris B.
 
ChrisBFRPKY said:
Umm, for the record,

Clarence Thomas was the last HW Bush appointee.

"Thomas was confirmed by the United States Senate on October 15, 1991, in a 52–48 vote.[8]

Ruth Joan Bader Ginsburg (born Joan Ruth Bader; March 15, 1933)[2]:3 is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Ginsburg was appointed by President Bill Clinton and took the oath of office on August 10, 1993"

From Wiki
Chris B.
Click to expand...

Kindly name the nominee to the Supreme Court that was not afforded a hearing or vote by the Senate in 1992 due to Democrat obstruction.
 
Hercules56 said:
Kindly name the nominee to the Supreme Court that was not afforded a hearing or vote by the Senate in 1992 due to Democrat obstruction.
Click to expand...


Added info: There was no appointee, Biden was speaking of a "hypothetical opening"
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom