Jump to content
chare chare (Member)

Senate GOP divided over whether they'd fill Supreme Court vacancy

Politics   (36,495 Views 16 Comments)
49,695 Visitors; 643 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
Quote

Senate Republicans are conflicted about what to do if a Supreme Court seat becomes vacant during the remainder of President Trump's first term, a possibility that has come more into focus in recent weeks in light of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's health problems.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has made clear that he intends to fill a Supreme Court vacancy in 2020, despite holding the seat vacated by the death of the late conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia open during the 2016 presidential election.

"Oh, we'd fill it," McConnell said with a smile when asked last year whether he would act to confirm a Trump nominee to the Supreme Court should a seat become vacant.

[...]

Senate GOP divided over whether they'd fill Supreme Court vacancy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, chare said:

 

Of course they would fill it...current Senate Republicans, as a group, have exactly zero ethics, honesty or patriotism. We would expect them to do exactly the opposite of what they demanded in 2008.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, toomuchbaloney said:

...We would expect them to do exactly the opposite of what they demanded in 2008.

Which demand you're referring to?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chare said:

Which demand you're referring to?

Wrong date, my apologies.  Surely you haven't forgotten the demand to hold all judicial nominations the last year of a presidency. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, toomuchbaloney said:

Wrong date, my apologies.  Surely you haven't forgotten the demand to hold all judicial nominations the last year of a presidency. 

Thank you for clarifying.  No, I haven't forgotten, although it was more than a threat in the case of Mr. Obama's nomination of Mr. Merrick.

I have a problem when one side implements some "rule" to side step accepted senate rules, such as Mr. McConnell's implementation of the so-called Biden or Thurmond "rule" to limit or block judicial nominations.  I disagree with Mr. McConnell's assertion that this situation is different considering that the senate majority and President are both Republican and would have a bigger problem if he allowed a nomination to be considered now, if one were to occur.  

Should a vacancy occur on the Supreme Court, I hope that four Republican senators will do what is right and block the nomination.

Edited by chare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, chare said:

Thank you for clarifying.  No, I haven't forgotten, although it was more than a threat in the case of Mr. Obama's nomination of Mr. Merrick.

I have a problem when one side implements some "rule" to side step accepted senate rules, such as Mr. McConnell's implementation of the so-called Biden or Thurmond "rule" to limit or block judicial nominations.  I disagree with Mr. McConnell's assertion that this situation is different considering that the senate majority and President are both Republican and would have a bigger problem if he allowed a nomination to be considered now, if one were to occur.  

Should a vacancy occur on the Supreme Court, I hope that four Republican senators will do what is right and block the nomination.

At this point, we can only hope Chare

Who, besides Mitt Romney, do you think would cross that line?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Lil Nel said:

At this point, we can only hope Chare

Who, besides Mitt Romney, do you think would cross that line?

I’m not sure.  Ms. Murkowski and Mr. Grassley, according the article seem to be against it.  When you consider that Mr. McConnell has signaled that Republican senators in difficult races can distance themselves from Mr. Trump, I think it possibile that there are others that would not support this.

Quote

Sen. Mitch McConnell is allowing Republican Senate candidates to do whatever it takes to salvage their campaigns ahead of what Republicans increasingly fear could be a devastating election for their party.

In recent weeks, the Senate majority leader has become so concerned over Republicans losing control of the Senate that he has signaled to vulnerable GOP senators in tough races that they could distance themselves from the President if they feel it is necessary, according to multiple senior Republicans including a source close to McConnell.

[...]

McConnell signal to Republican Senate candidates: Distance from Trump if necessary

 

Edited by chare
Formatting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, chare said:

I’m not sure.  Ms. Murkowski and Mr. Grassley, according the article seem to be against it.  When you consider that Mr. McConnell has signaled that Republican senators in difficult races can distance themselves from Mr. Trump, I think it possibile that there are others that would not support this.

 

Yes. I have read that. But I just don't know.

Baloney lives in Senator Murkowski land. 

What do you think, baloney?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Murkowski isn't running in November...Sullivan is.  Murkowski showed us in January that she will stand with the party against what is correct or constitutional. I'm registered to participate in their virtual townhall this afternoon...I'm a liberal so it's unlikely I will be allowed a question. Sullivan is simply a partisan hack building a career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on Friday that he will hold a vote on President Donald Trump's nominee to fill the vacancy left by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. 

In a statement issued just over an hour after the Supreme Court said that Ginsburg had passed, McConnell said the nominee, who has not been named, "will receive a vote on the floor." 

[...]

Trump nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Supreme Court will get Senate vote, McConnell says

Apparently he's going to do this.  I think this speaks to his character, and confirms what I've long thought of him.  It will be interesting to see if any of the Republican senators breaknranks with this.

Edited by chare
Spelling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of them, especially McConnell will show their true colors.  Sad thing is they don't care a bit about being hypocrites.  They want that power.  McConnell in particular had made judge appointments a priority in his tenure and he's at the top of his game. 

At first I thought the American people whom are republicans, whom generally have a sense of fairness and what is right, would not agree with him that there is now a different set of rules now that republicans are in power as opposed to when Obama was President.  That was blown to bits as I saw  people care more about upsetting liberals than fairness.   Coming from a populace that doesn't care that the President is a chronic liar this shouldn't surprise me that they don't care.

Really while it won't do any good, all the Democrats have to do is quote Republicans.

 

2016, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas): “It has been 80 years since a Supreme Court vacancy was nominated and confirmed in an election year. There is a long tradition that you don’t do this in an election year.”

2018, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.): “If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait to the next election.”

2016, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.): “I don’t think we should be moving on a nominee in the last year of this president’s term - I would say that if it was a Republican president.”

2016, Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.): “The very balance of our nation’s highest court is in serious jeopardy. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I will do everything in my power to encourage the president and Senate leadership not to start this process until we hear from the American people.”

2016, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa): “A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice.”

2016, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.): “The campaign is already under way. It is essential to the institution of the Senate and to the very health of our republic to not launch our nation into a partisan, divisive confirmation battle during the very same time the American people are casting their ballots to elect our next president.”

2016, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.): “In this election year, the American people will have an opportunity to have their say in the future direction of our country. For this reason, I believe the vacancy left open by Justice Antonin Scalia should not be filled until there is a new president.”

2016, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.): “The Senate should not confirm a new Supreme Court justice until we have a new president.”

2016, Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Col.): “I think we’re too close to the election. The president who is elected in November should be the one who makes this decision.”

2016, Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio): “I believe the best thing for the country is to trust the American people to weigh in on who should make a lifetime appointment that could reshape the Supreme Court for generations. This wouldn’t be unusual. It is common practice for the Senate to stop acting on lifetime appointments during the last year of a presidential term, and it’s been nearly 80 years since any president was permitted to immediately fill a vacancy that arose in a presidential election year.”

2016, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.): “I strongly agree that the American people should decide the future direction of the Supreme Court by their votes for president and the majority party in the U.S. Senate.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think right now there are only 2 Senators and perhaps Romney, but they need four.  Apparently finding one more to break rank isn't likely.  This is painful.

The new "lock her up" is now "fill that seat!"   Which dashes my hope in the voters sense of fairness.   Whatever upsets liberals is what they are going to do, especially when following the leader whom they know liberals despise.

 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-rally-crowd-chants-fill-that-seat-as-supreme-court-choice-looms?fbclid=IwAR2BACdabrcvuq6rLRxAwCILkCcXad5tyhCw8Gz10VpE6kKy7BbpFsdX928

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×

This site uses cookies. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Read our Privacy, Cookies, and Terms of Service Policies to learn more.