March 21, 201610 yr Supreme Court -- Merrick Garland: Republicans’ Nomination Blocking Is Indefensible He makes too much sense to be listened to.
March 21, 201610 yr The hardcore lefties don't like when the repubs use the playbook Mr. Biden gave them back in 1992, when he suggested blocking a nomination during an election year.
March 21, 201610 yr The hardcore lefties don't like when the repubs use the playbook Mr. Biden gave them back in 1992, when he suggested blocking a nomination during an election year. What did Republicans think about Biden's comments in 1992?
March 21, 201610 yr He alone does hold the right and the responsibility to nominate a Supreme Court Justice. Congress has the right to not approve his nominee. They both have a job to do to insure our highest court is fully functioning by having all 9 seats full. To interrupt the process is just stupid. I did not say he could not nominate. I said he could not unilaterally 'appoint'. He has the right to nominate and with the approval of Congress, appoint. The approval of Congress is the sticking point here. It is not necessary to vote on a nominee just because a nominee is presented. There is no right to a hearing or even a right to consideration. The Congress can ignore a nomination completely if they so choose.
March 21, 201610 yr What did Republicans think about Biden's comments in 1992? Probably the same way Obama feels about them today.
March 21, 201610 yr I did not say he could not nominate. I said he could not unilaterally 'appoint'. He has the right to nominate and with the approval of Congress, appoint. The approval of Congress is the sticking point here. It is not necessary to vote on a nominee just because a nominee is presented. There is no right to a hearing or even a right to consideration. The Congress can ignore a nomination completely if they so choose. Yes they can ignore the nomination, and it has been done in the past. However, in this case it's a case of Congress being spiteful. A bunch of grown men and purported leaders acting like elementary school kids.
March 21, 201610 yr Yes they can ignore the nomination, and it has been done in the past. However, in this case it's a case of Congress being spiteful. A bunch of grown men and purported leaders acting like elementary school kids. I was not aware a nomination had been ignored in the past. When did that happen? What is the longest a seat has remained open on the Supreme Court?
March 21, 201610 yr Yes they can ignore the nomination, and it has been done in the past. However, in this case it's a case of Congress being spiteful. A bunch of grown men and purported leaders acting like elementary school kids. Politics and spite. A pretty good bet this is the case whenever this issue has come up previously, and will be the case when it comes up in the future. It is the nature of the beast when you have a two party system where political views are so diametrically opposed on so many issues. Garland has shown his distaste for 2nd Amendment rights. The majority in Congress oppose his views on this issue. If he is dead in the water, why waste time and effort considering his nomination?
March 21, 201610 yr GOP just needs to hold the confirmation, vote no and put the ball back in Presidents court.
March 21, 201610 yr I was not aware a nomination had been ignored in the past. When did that happen? What is the longest a seat has remained open on the Supreme Court? There have been a dozen or so nominees (mostly in the 1800's) where congress basically chose inaction to force the President to bring a new nominee to the table. Here's a Washington Post article that discusses some of the history that's relevant. Does the Senate have a constitutional responsibility to consider a Supreme Court nomination? - The Washington Post
March 21, 201610 yr GOP just needs to hold the confirmation, vote no and put the ball back in Presidents court. Why waste time a taxpayer money on a DOA candidate?
March 21, 201610 yr Why waste time a taxpayer money on a DOA candidate? Why waste time by not doing their job?
March 21, 201610 yr Why waste time by not doing their job? But they are doing their job. Perhaps not the way some would like them to, but doing it nonetheless.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.