RBG dead at 87

[Remius]

Sad news.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-dead/index.html

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Wonder if Trump will nominate prior to the election? That will be fought tooth and nail. Whoever gets to fill that seat will influence the direction of the US for the next 20 years.

 

[Remius]

Wonder if Trump will nominate prior to the election? That will be fought tooth and nail. Whoever gets to fill that seat will influence the direction of the US for the next 20 years.

Not sure there is enough time for that.  Probably enough procedural tricks to stall him.

If Trump wins the election, absolutely, he will leave his mark for decades.

 

[Donald H]

Not sure there is enough time for that.  Probably enough procedural tricks to stall him.

If Trump wins the election, absolutely, he will leave his mark for decades.

Absolutely no doubt that Trump will try to do it and he's likely within the law!

So for a guess on who Trump would pick? How about Bill Barr, considering that Barr will be unemployed if Trump loses?

 

[BeyondTheNow]

She was the epitome of strength, grit and paved the way for many females of her time.

Such a tremendous loss for a nation already in so much turmoil.

“She proved that discrimination against women hurts men too. She stood up for the powerless & stood by her principles.

She taught that even if our argument loses today, it might win over another audience tomorrow.”

Adam Grant, PhD Psychology
University of Michigan
BA Harvard

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Wonder if Trump will nominate prior to the election? That will be fought tooth and nail. Whoever gets to fill that seat will influence the direction of the US for the next 20 years.

Don't forget that even if Trump loses the election he has 78 days before Bidens inauguration where he can still nominate a replacement.

 

[tomahawk6]

If you thought that Cavenaugh was a mess this will be worse this close to the election. There arent enough staunch GOP seantors maybe a tie with Pence voting otherwise it might take a couple Democrat senators to get any nominee over the finish line.

 

[mariomike]

Some may remember what Senate Republicans had to say when Justice Scalia died nine months prior to the 2016 election.

That was 247 days before the election. Now it's 47 days.

 

[Xylric]

Some may remember what Senate Republicans had to say when Justice Scalia died nine months prior to the 2016 election.

That was 247 days before the election. Now it's 47 days.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but the weekends don't count on this, do they?

Probably closer to essentially half that in working days.

 

[QV]

The best political move Trump could do his defer nomination until he wins. It’s only a small gamble.

 

[mariomike]

And correct me if I'm wrong, but the weekends don't count on this, do they?

I'll let you do the math.

Someone remarked it would be funny if "the Dems" were to,

- Increase the number of justices on the bench
- End the filibuster in the Senate
- Make DC and Puerto Rico states
- Pass voting rights legislation

 

[Donald H]

The best political move Trump could do his defer nomination until he wins. It’s only a small gamble.

McConnell has already declared that Trump's nominee will be given a vote by the Senate. And fwiw, the only nominee I've heard mentioned so far is Ted Cruz.

Are you suggesting that Trump going ahead and getting another one of his choices on the Scotus would hurt his election chances?

I think those days are long gone from US politics.

:cheers:

 

[The Bread Guy]

Wonder if Trump will nominate prior to the election? That will be fought tooth and nail. Whoever gets to fill that seat will influence the direction of the US for the next 20 years.

Let's see what Republican Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has had to say ....

• 2016, 247 days before an election:  “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”
• 2020, 47 days before an election:  “Americans reelected our majority in 2016 and expanded it in 2018 because we pledged to work with President Trump and support his agenda, particularly his outstanding appointments to the federal judiciary. Once again, we will keep our promise ... President Trump’s nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate.”

op:

 

[tomahawk6]

Wait until after the election when the Republicans might lose control of the Senate so that leaves doing it now , although without some Democrat suppott may not be possible.

 

[mariomike]

Wait until after the election when the Republicans might lose control of the Senate so that leaves doing it now , although without some Democrat suppott may not be possible.

As I understand it, the Senate is a pretty tough nut to crack for "the Dems".

The roughly 2.7 million people living in Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, and North Dakota have the same number of Senators representing them as the 110 million or so people living in California, Texas, Florida, and New York.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Trump will nominate.  A candidate was nominated every other (29) time a vacancy opened during an election year.  He reportedly remarked that he would nominate Barrett if Ginsburg's position became vacant.  Angry people who voted for Trump because they like his combativeness will not vote for him if he backs down by throwing away a nomination and rolling the dice on re-election.

McConnell will attempt to confirm.  He said so.  The presidency and Senate are not divided between parties, which is not the same as in 2016.

The question is whether McConnell can come up with the votes.  Except for the very few senators who insist on standing on some principle and either are willing to sacrifice re-election or hold an insurmountably safe seat, failure to confirm by Republicans would be political death for several of them.

The law is clear, and there aren't any remaining norms against a nomination and confirmation.  People can pound the table all they want.  I can't conceive of Democrats behaving any differently if they had been in the same positions in 2016 or now.  Their position on USSC staffing is pure hardball.

Dan McLaughlin at NRO, writes about some history and some comments by the players.

 

[Brad Sallows]

>The roughly 2.7 million people living in Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, and North Dakota have the same number of Senators representing them as the 110 million or so people living in California, Texas, Florida, and New York.

The roughly 1 million people living in Rhode Island have the same number of Senators representing them as the 29 million or so people living in Texas.

What does it all mean???!!! 

 

[tomahawk6]

The Founders considered the difference between large states vs small and came p with the Senate where every state had 2 Senators no matter their size. Today large states like California and New York have 2 Senatos the same as smaller states. Otherwise large States could dominate the country. They also conjured up an electoral college which requires a winner to have a majority in the college just not a plurality of votes.

 

[mariomike]

What does it all mean???!!!

Power!!!

Whites have 0.35 Senators per million people, while Blacks have 0.26, Asian-Americans 0.25, and Latinos just 0.19.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/14/opinion/dc-puerto-rico-statehood-senate.html

 

[kkwd]

Power!!!

Whites have 0.35 Senators per million people, while Blacks have 0.26, Asian-Americans 0.25, and Latinos just 0.19.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/14/opinion/dc-puerto-rico-statehood-senate.html

No. The Senate represents the interests of the state. Every state is equal therefore each gets the same representation. The people in the state are represented by the House. The Senate used to be appointed by the state until elections were put in place for it. When a Senator leaves office before the end of their term the Governor appoints another one.