SCOTUS Thread (News and Discussion): Eight Becomes Nine

**Cail** · 2017-01-31 19:53

Seeing as there is no SCOTUS thread, I figured we could use one. Instead of just lumping all our discussions in the Small Hands thread, SCOTUS news and discussion of topics can go here.

As most of us know, Trump will be announcing his nomination for the vacant SCOTUS position in 10 minutes.

**Cail** · 2017-01-31 20:04

Neil Gorsuch is the nominee

**Aerin** · 2017-01-31 20:49

Originally Posted by Andalusian girls

if anyone wants to read up on the man with more depth than 'he's conservative!'

http://www.scotusblog.com/2017/01/po...-neil-gorsuch/

and rumors already flying the 80-year old Kennedy who has long hinted at retirement will be much more comfortable doing so with Trump nominating his former clerk as SCOTUS pick #1

.

**Cail** · 2017-01-31 20:56

How soon would his confirmation hearings be?

**archibaldcrane** · 2017-01-31 21:10

Does anyone think filibustering him would be a good idea on the whole? I mean sure it could raise the profile of whoever does it and benefit them personally, but is doing so a good strategy for the Democrats?

I think probably not.

**Day** · 2017-01-31 21:15

idk but soros and co. already got some "Neil Gorsuch: Extreme and Dangerous" signs printed up and they out at capital already lmao

**Fiye** · 2017-01-31 21:16

Democrats are nowhere near as disciplined as Republicans and with the nuclear option being present there's not much they can do. All they need to do is spend the time they can making him look awful and just let republicans take it from there.

**Andalusian girls** · 2017-01-31 21:41

Originally Posted by Cail

How soon would his confirmation hearings be?

the variance between nomination and confirmation historically has been between 20-100 days (outside of Garland). Senate leadership will have to schedule the hearings, but Democrats can trigger more than one procedural barrier to delay the process which might lead to more like 100 than 20.

however their resistance strategy, if one can call what they are doing strategy, is in tatters. the Bernie wing is demanding both unprecedented (yes, unprecedented) obstructionist tactics and a full filibuster on the SCOTUS pick, while red-state Democrats up for reelection in 2018 are telling the children of San Francisco to go fuck themselves and their ideological purity. much depends on what Schumer wants to and is capable of doing with his bruised party.

that is perhaps over much text to say, between 20 and 100 days, but who knows with more specificity than that. Republicans will push for the hearings to begin, and end, quickly, we shall have to wait and see how the Democrats react. for what it's worth Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley expects Gorsuch to be on the bench by April which would probably place the hearings in March.

**archibaldcrane** · 2017-01-31 21:48

I don't have a problem with what they're doing with Price and Mnuchin, but that's a pretty different scenario honestly.

**chazzyphizzle** · 2017-01-31 22:02

dems need to stop stamping their feet screaming about how life isnt fair. it sucks, but putting up some kind of united front against a decently reasonable judge is A. not going to do anything to stop his confirmation and B. not going to translate to votes in the mid term

**Talint** · 2017-01-31 22:32

Any judge that isn't Merrick Garland needs to be filibustered.

But Democrats are too spineless to force McConnell to go nuclear.

**Deftscythe** · 2017-02-01 00:06

Originally Posted by chazzyphizzle

dems need to stop stamping their feet screaming about how life isnt fair.

It worked for the GOP.

**Fiye** · 2017-02-01 00:47

Except the GOP are faithful to the party above all else. Dems don't work the same way. I'd expect Joe and Heidi at the very least to get out of line.

**Talint** · 2017-02-01 00:54

Then they are useless and should be primaried.

Inb4 cries of purity tests.

**Quicklet** · 2017-02-01 04:04

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

Does anyone think filibustering him would be a good idea on the whole? I mean sure it could raise the profile of whoever does it and benefit them personally, but is doing so a good strategy for the Democrats?

I think probably not.

Stolen seat. Republicans are just going to nuke the filibuster on the next nominee. Might as well get it over with and energize the base.

Any Democrat who votes for cloture deserves to be primaried.

**SephYuyX** · 2017-02-01 18:34

Getting a republican seat was basically the sole reason that I voted Trump. That and Clinton has weird toes. No thanks.

**archibaldcrane** · 2017-02-01 18:49

Originally Posted by Quicklet

Stolen seat. Republicans are just going to nuke the filibuster on the next nominee. Might as well get it over with and energize the base.

Any Democrat who votes for cloture deserves to be primaried.

Circular lib firing squads are already lining up to serve Trump in their full capacity I see.

**Talint** · 2017-02-01 19:18

Originally Posted by archibaldcrane

Circular lib firing squads are already lining up to serve Trump in their full capacity I see.

What do the democrats get for not playing hardball here, exactly.

**archibaldcrane** · 2017-02-01 20:19

Originally Posted by Talint

What do the democrats get for not playing hardball here, exactly.

Media focus on Trump's ongoing disaster of an administration.

You don't want the spotlight to be on the thing he did well. (and yes us libs hate this pick, but he's very qualified and fulfills a campaign promise and is a major reason he was elected)

**Aerin** · 2017-02-01 20:34

I'd be curious to see if Hardiman was nominated to replace Kennedy if he decides to retire. Because while Trump's 2 picks would certainly tilt the court further to the right, it wouldn't be a drastic shift.

Thread: SCOTUS Thread (News and Discussion): Eight Becomes Nine

Thread Tools

SCOTUS Thread (News and Discussion): Eight Becomes Nine

Similar Threads

The who will you be voting for Poll and Discussion Thread

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads