Should Supreme Court appt.hearings be delayed?

[late]

Sen. Corey Booker is pushing to get the hearings pushed back until after the election.

"I think it is questionable that we should be considering a nominee from a president who has a history of demanding these loyalty tests and we could be responsible for participating in something that could undermine that investigation.

I do not believe that this committee should or can in good conscience consider a nominee put forward by this president until that investigation is concluded. Not only do I believe that we should abide by the rule set by [Majority Leader] McConnell, but I think we should look at the larger moment that we're in American history and that conflict of interest that is clearly present in this president."

If you run across a law prof discussing this, I'd like to see it.

Currently the second video: Dems push to stall SCOTUS confirmation

The Rachel Maddow Show on msnbc ? Latest News & Video

 

[Common Sense 1]

Simple NO!

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Wednesday that his chamber will work to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy before the midterms.

"We will vote to confirm Justice Kennedy's successor this fall," he said while speaking on the Senate floor immediately after the news.

 

[SheWolf]

Sen. Corey Booker is pushing to get the hearings pushed back until after the election.

"I think it is questionable that we should be considering a nominee from a president who has a history of demanding these loyalty tests and we could be responsible for participating in something that could undermine that investigation.

I do not believe that this committee should or can in good conscience consider a nominee put forward by this president until that investigation is concluded. Not only do I believe that we should abide by the rule set by [Majority Leader] McConnell, but I think we should look at the larger moment that we're in American history and that conflict of interest that is clearly present in this president."

If you run across a law prof discussing this, I'd like to see it.

Currently the second video: Dems push to stall SCOTUS confirmation

The Rachel Maddow Show on msnbc ? Latest News & Video

I think it's completely fair given Mcconnell's record. He held up a nominee for over a year. Democrats should fight him on this.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Brooker is just primping for his White House run.
And this will part of a coordinated attempt to stop the nomination
from going forward.

 

[Cardinal]

All lifetime appointments should be delayed until after the investigation on the basis that there are so many unanswered questions about his behavior and his relations to a hostile foreign government. Finally, they should be delayed until we have a clear understanding of how his businesses are profiting as a result of his position. That would include a full audit of his businesses as well as the full release of his tax returns.

I will go so far as to say that this should be applied retroactively. In other words, all past appointments should be put on permanent suspension until all of the above issues have been resolved.

 

[Harshaw]

All lifetime appointments should be delayed until after the investigation on the basis that there are so many unanswered questions about his behavior and his relations to a hostile foreign government. Finally, they should be delayed until we have a clear understanding of how his businesses are profiting as a result of his position. That would include a full audit of his businesses as well as the full release of his tax returns.

I will go so far as to say that this should be applied retroactively. In other words, all past appointments should be put on permanent suspension until all of the above issues have been resolved.

Yeah.

Any credibility to this went out the window as soon as more than 55% of Democratic Party primary voters voted to nominate for President someone who was under criminal investigation at the time.

This is transparent and sad.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I see no reason for a delay. Congress has a Constituional responsibility to seat a Justice. I felt that way when Republicans skirted their duty for political gain and I still feel that way.

 

[Cardinal]

I see no reason for a delay. Congress has a Constituional responsibility to seat a Justice. I felt that way when Republicans skirted their duty for political gain and I still feel that way.

These are not remotely similar situations. In other words, putting trump's appointments on hold now is not the same situation as what the Republicans did in Obama's last year.

 

[Josie]

All lifetime appointments should be delayed until after the investigation on the basis that there are so many unanswered questions about his behavior and his relations to a hostile foreign government. Finally, they should be delayed until we have a clear understanding of how his businesses are profiting as a result of his position. That would include a full audit of his businesses as well as the full release of his tax returns.

I will go so far as to say that this should be applied retroactively. In other words, all past appointments should be put on permanent suspension until all of the above issues have been resolved.

....until a Democratic President is under investigation.

 

[PLizzy]

....until a Democratic President is under investigation.

And then he can do all things Trump did and have a Congress to back him.

 

[Casper]

Sen. Corey Booker is pushing to get the hearings pushed back until after the election.

"I think it is questionable that we should be considering a nominee from a president who has a history of demanding these loyalty tests and we could be responsible for participating in something that could undermine that investigation.

I do not believe that this committee should or can in good conscience consider a nominee put forward by this president until that investigation is concluded. Not only do I believe that we should abide by the rule set by [Majority Leader] McConnell, but I think we should look at the larger moment that we're in American history and that conflict of interest that is clearly present in this president."

If you run across a law prof discussing this, I'd like to see it.

Currently the second video: Dems push to stall SCOTUS confirmation

The Rachel Maddow Show on msnbc ? Latest News & Video

Not sure the Dems have the power to stop/delay a vote, but if they can then yes they should delay it as long as possible.

 

[PLizzy]

All lifetime appointments should be delayed until after the investigation on the basis that there are so many unanswered questions about his behavior and his relations to a hostile foreign government. Finally, they should be delayed until we have a clear understanding of how his businesses are profiting as a result of his position. That would include a full audit of his businesses as well as the full release of his tax returns.

I will go so far as to say that this should be applied retroactively. In other words, all past appointments should be put on permanent suspension until all of the above issues have been resolved.

Meh, I'm not worried about it.

Let em' play the game the way they've been playing it and then we'll return the favor when the political winds shift.

 

[PLizzy]

Not sure the Dems have the power to stop/delay a vote, but if they can then yes they should delay it as long as possible.

All they can do is not show-up for roll call in the Senate, or threaten to let the government run out of money.

Mitch will bring all the rules he needs to though in the end.

 

[SheWolf]

All lifetime appointments should be delayed until after the investigation on the basis that there are so many unanswered questions about his behavior and his relations to a hostile foreign government. Finally, they should be delayed until we have a clear understanding of how his businesses are profiting as a result of his position. That would include a full audit of his businesses as well as the full release of his tax returns.

I will go so far as to say that this should be applied retroactively. In other words, all past appointments should be put on permanent suspension until all of the above issues have been resolved.

I saw a headline saying one of the people on Trump's list has previously argued that presidents shouldn't be inconvenienced by investigations. That says it all.

 

[Cardinal]

Not sure the Dems have the power to stop/delay a vote, but if they can then yes they should delay it as long as possible.

As I said in a related thread, I'm not sure that any mechanisms for delaying an appointment are left. All existing ones were instantly dismantled by McConnell to push through all of trump's appointments, and it's fair to say that any existing ones will be similarly dismantled. This is why impeachment of current appointments may be the only viable option.

 

[SheWolf]

Yeah.

Any credibility to this went out the window as soon as more than 55% of Democratic Party primary voters voted to nominate for President someone who was under criminal investigation at the time.

This is transparent and sad.

She didn't get elected. She had very soft support among the people who voted for her. Unlike Trump. Trump supporters are loyal, and he is the most popular president within the Republican party... ever.

 

[Cardinal]

I saw a headline saying one of the people on Trump's list has previously argued that presidents shouldn't be inconvenienced by investigations. That says it all.

Yep, I saw that too. That's also an omen of the most important question: if the investigation of trump makes it to SCOTUS, will trump's appointed Justices recuse themselves? That guy's answer strongly suggests that he won't.

 

[SheWolf]

....until a Democratic President is under investigation.

Yeah, exactly... but for now, it's not a dem. :lol:

When a Obama was in office, it was argued that it was too close to an election and the voters should decide.

 

[Moon]

It's really up to McConnell to decide, and I'd be surprised if he delayed it. All this posturing by Democrats is just theater.

 

[SheWolf]

Meh, I'm not worried about it.

Let em' play the game the way they've been playing it and then we'll return the favor when the political winds shift.

If liberals start gerrymandering the crap out of states, that's when the supreme court will overturn it... :lol:

 

[Moon]

....until a Democratic President is under investigation.

Yep, that's how the game is played.

 

[jamesrage]

Sen. Corey Booker is pushing to get the hearings pushed back until after the election.

"I think it is questionable that we should be considering a nominee from a president who has a history of demanding these loyalty tests and we could be responsible for participating in something that could undermine that investigation.

I do not believe that this committee should or can in good conscience consider a nominee put forward by this president until that investigation is concluded. Not only do I believe that we should abide by the rule set by [Majority Leader] McConnell, but I think we should look at the larger moment that we're in American history and that conflict of interest that is clearly present in this president."

If you run across a law prof discussing this, I'd like to see it.

Currently the second video: Dems push to stall SCOTUS confirmation

The Rachel Maddow Show on msnbc ? Latest News & Video

If democrats had the majority near the end of Obama's term there is no way they would have waited. We know this by all the lib-tards accusing republicans of stealing the supreme court seat even though there was precedent of previous administrations not getting to pick a supreme court judge when close to the next elections. I also remember democrats changing the rules for simple majority when it came to judicial appointments so Obama can appoint some judges now its biting them ass. So **** Rachael Madcow. because I sure she is one of those morons accusing the republicans of stealing a supreme court slot.

 

[SheWolf]

Yep, I saw that too. That's also an omen of the most important question: if the investigation of trump makes it to SCOTUS, will trump's appointed Justices recuse themselves? That guy's answer strongly suggests that he won't.

I read your other post. Could his appointments be impeached?

 

[Cardinal]

It's really up to McConnell to decide, and I'd be surprised if he delayed it. All this posturing by Democrats is just theater.

Which is quite specifically the problem. With the judicial filibuster and the blue slip, all Congressmen, not just those in the majority, had a voice in such an important decision. With the removal of the filibuster and blue slip the power of lifetime appointments is no longer a trusted institution (especially where the President's loyalties are so obviously in question).

 

[Cardinal]

I read your other post. Could his appointments be impeached?

Yes. Admittedly it's a high bar (and for good reason), but yes, they can be impeached.