Toronto Escorts

Will Trump replace RBG in his current term?

Will Trump replace RBG on the Supreme Court

  • He will succeed

    Votes: 18 69.2%
  • He won't succeed

    Votes: 4 15.4%
  • I agree with Trump

    Votes: 4 15.4%
  • I don't agree with Trump

    Votes: 12 46.2%

  • Total voters
    26

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,707
3,402
113
Reports out Trump met Barrett at the WH today.
 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Even worse, one GOP senator says they wouldn't let a Biden win stop them from making an appointment between Nov. 3 and inauguration.



Ahead of a GOP Senate leadership meeting tonight, GOP Sen. John Cornyn was asked if the Senate would confirm a Trump nominee in a lame-duck session if Joe Biden wins the presidency.

His response: “You mean while we're still in our term office, and President Trump is? Of course.”

Cornyn, a member of the leadership team, was asked if the vote could happen before the election. He said that it typically takes more than two months and added that the ones that happened quicker were consensus nominees.

“You know, it's sort of like a vaccine — I’m for doing vaccine when it's safe and effective. But I'm not for accelerating the process just for that," he said,

Asked about taking the opposite position in 2016, Cornyn said, “That’s because President Obama was term limited out.”

A full meeting of Senate Republicans is scheduled for Tuesday.

 

basketcase

Well-known member
Dec 29, 2005
59,732
6,288
113
Of course Trump wants another of his appointees before the election so they can declare him the election winner even if he loses.
 

wigglee

Well-known member
Oct 13, 2010
9,819
1,603
113
Trump said last month that he would “absolutely” try to fill a vacancy if one came up before the end of his first term.

“I would move quickly, “ Trump said in an interview with conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt.

“Why not? I mean, they would. The Democrats would if they were in this position.”

^^Anyone who refutes this is either: 1) lying 2) in denial 3) being wilfully ignorant
Too bad that Trump, Cruz, McConnell ,Graham and Rubio all waxed poetic 4 years ago about letting the people decide in an election year.....making them liars, in denial AND willfully ignorant hypocrites. But we already knew that, didn't we.
 

latinboy

Active member
Jan 22, 2011
746
180
43
Flashback: In 2016, Ginsburg said Senate should hold SCOTUS confirmation hearing during election year

Ginsburg remarked in 2016 that 'nothing in the Constitution' precludes 11th hour nomination.


In 2016, when a lame-duck President Obama tapped Merrick Garland to replace the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, Democratic leaders had no problem with the move. And neither did Ginsburg.

"There's nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year," Ginsburg said in a 2016 New York Times interview.

This time, McConnell maintains that it has been Washington precedent since the 1880s for a Senate of a different party than the president not to consider the nomination of a justice in an election year.

Ginsburg had an opinion on that back in 2016, too. Speaking before the New York City Bar Association in October of that year, Ginsburg appeared alongside her fellow New York native Justice Sonia Sotomayor and remarked that a divided court with an even number of justices is not an ideal way to move forward even in the short term.



 

latinboy

Active member
Jan 22, 2011
746
180
43
In Scalia's case, his death occurred just as primaries were starting. RBG's was just over a month from election day. Makes a bit of a difference.

It's not like it hasn't been done before:


SCOTUS Confirmation by Nov. 3 Would Be Difficult But Not Unprecedented

LAURA DAVISON SEPTEMBER 21, 2020


The U.S. Senate would have to move unusually quickly to confirm President Donald Trump’s planned replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court before Election Day.

Trump said he planned to announce his nominee on Friday or Saturday, which would be less than 40 days until the Nov. 3 election. Only two times since 1975 has the chamber been able to confirm a Supreme Court pick in less time.

The late John Paul Stevens’s confirmation in 1975 took just 19 days, while former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor saw 33 days elapse from when she was nominated until a Senate vote in 1981.

Ginsburg herself had the third-shortest wait in that time -- 42 days.


 

latinboy

Active member
Jan 22, 2011
746
180
43
Too bad that Trump, Cruz, McConnell ,Graham and Rubio all waxed poetic 4 years ago about letting the people decide in an election year.....making them liars, in denial AND willfully ignorant hypocrites. But we already knew that, didn't we.

Too bad that Biden and Ginsburg all waxed poetic 4 years ago about letting the people decide in an election year.....making them liars, in denial AND wilfully ignorant hypocrites. But we already knew that, didn't we.
 
Last edited:

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Too bad that Trump, Cruz, McConnell ,Graham and Rubio all waxed poetic 4 years ago about letting the people decide in an election year.....making them liars, in denial AND willfully ignorant hypocrites. But we already knew that, didn't we.
On the flip side this lets Biden put out ads saying that Trump is going to make abortion illegal and kill the remains of health care.
Though at the same time it gives him something else to talk about than the deaths he has caused.

 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
8,043
5,521
113
Rules norms laws and ethics only apply to non republicans. The rule isn't the problem, its the application of the rule. Repub presidents can fill during an election year. Dem presidents cannot. Either both can, or both can't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: y2kmark

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
It's not like it hasn't been done before:


SCOTUS Confirmation by Nov. 3 Would Be Difficult But Not Unprecedented

LAURA DAVISON SEPTEMBER 21, 2020


The U.S. Senate would have to move unusually quickly to confirm President Donald Trump’s planned replacement for Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court before Election Day.

Trump said he planned to announce his nominee on Friday or Saturday, which would be less than 40 days until the Nov. 3 election. Only two times since 1975 has the chamber been able to confirm a Supreme Court pick in less time.

The late John Paul Stevens’s confirmation in 1975 took just 19 days, while former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor saw 33 days elapse from when she was nominated until a Senate vote in 1981.


Ginsburg herself had the third-shortest wait in that time -- 42 days.


Or the Republicans can simply hold a vote next week and be done with it. The Constitution calls on the Senate to advise and consent. Nowhere does it state that the Senate must hold hearings.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Or the Republicans can simply hold a vote next week and be done with it. The Constitution calls on the Senate to advise and consent. Nowhere does it state that the Senate must hold hearings.
They should totally do it, would let the dems impeach Trump's choice in Feb.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
They should totally do it, would let the dems impeach Trump's choice in Feb.
Impeach for what; acting within the law? I see that fascism is taking a real hold on the left.
 

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
6,804
2,264
113
Impeach for what; acting within the law? I see that fascism is taking a real hold on the left.
If the Dems ever went through with this charade, the next constitutional amendment would be the repeal of the impeachment clause.
 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
8,043
5,521
113
Impeach for what; acting within the law? I see that fascism is taking a real hold on the left.
Family run corrupt no oversight constant lies. That's what's in fascism.
But I agree, must have a reason to impeach or else it is harassment. Like Benghazi.
 

Valcazar

Just a bundle of fucking sunshine
Mar 27, 2014
27,495
48,731
113
Romney is voting yes. He wrote something more mealy mouthed, but he said he is fine with them confirming before the election.

So that's that then.

I still expect announcement today or tomorrow and votes by next Friday at the latest.
 

Dutch Oven

Well-known member
Feb 12, 2019
6,804
2,264
113
Rules norms laws and ethics only apply to non republicans. The rule isn't the problem, its the application of the rule. Repub presidents can fill during an election year. Dem presidents cannot. Either both can, or both can't.
You can't ignore 2 realities here:

1) Obama was serving a second term. There was NO prospect of his administration continuing. Even a succeeding DEM president may have nominated someone different.
2) The GOP controlled the Senate and there was no propect of Garland's nomination being approved.

Neither of these facts are currently in play.

The DEMs should be reserving the criticism for themselves. They appointed a judge who overstayed her ability to serve by 7 years. Maybe they should make better selections when they are in power. Maybe they should appoint people who will step down before their death to allow for a more orderly transition.
 

kherg007

Well-known member
May 3, 2014
8,043
5,521
113
You can't ignore 2 realities here:

1) Obama was serving a second term. There was NO prospect of his administration continuing. Even a succeeding DEM president may have nominated someone different.
2) The GOP controlled the Senate and there was no propect of Garland's nomination being approved.

Neither of these facts are currently in play.

The DEMs should be reserving the criticism for themselves. They appointed a judge who overstayed her ability to serve by 7 years. Maybe they should make better selections when they are in power. Maybe they should appoint people who will step down before their death to allow for a more orderly transition.
Both realities irrelevant. The constitution says president nominates. Not a lame duck, not a first term. President.
It was McConnell who refused to bring it to a vote. Second, you're assuming Garland would have been rejected on party lines. That has not happened to any dem nominees on the court. And Garland is more centrist than the other current dem appointees on the court.
Also, I think all judges are never sure when they will die. Thus hard to criticise that. However, no one anticipated McConnell making up a rule (yes Biden said it once but disowned it later). She anticipated Hilary would win. But you're right she should have stepped down at 80 after first cancer bought. Thus if Biden wins watch Breyer step down lol.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
79,716
17,562
113
Romney is voting yes. He wrote something more mealy mouthed, but he said he is fine with them confirming before the election.

So that's that then.

I still expect announcement today or tomorrow and votes by next Friday at the latest.
Trump tweeted it will be Saturday.

Pelosi has said they still have things they will try.
Wonder what she's got in mind.

The only thing that could really mess this up is if any senators get the virus and can't vote, at this point.
 
Toronto Escorts