Breaking: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died at 87

xxxbishopxxx

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
How Mitch McConnell Can Quickly Push Through Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee
The rules and partisan breakdown of the Senate make it possible for Republicans to swiftly confirm President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee. Here’s how.


Senator Mitch McConnell has never shied away from an opportunity to pack the judiciary with conservative nominees.Credit...Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times
By Emily Cochrane
  • WASHINGTON — Hours after the Supreme Court announced the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, vowed that the Senate would vote on a replacement named by President Trump, setting up what is all but guaranteed to be a heated fight over the nation’s highest court that carries heavy political consequences.
That statement answered the question of whether Mr. McConnell, who in 2016 blocked President Barack Obama’s Supreme Court nominee because it was an election year, would dare try to confirm one named by Mr. Trump so close to an election. He would. Now the question is, can Mr. McConnell pull it off?
The process is likely to be ugly, but it can be done. Here’s how it works.

Can Democrats block Trump’s nominee through a filibuster?

No.
Democrats eliminated the 60-vote threshold for most judicial nominees in 2013, frustrated by Republicans’ use of the filibuster to slow and impede Mr. Obama’s agenda. In turn, angered by resistance to the nomination of Justice Neil M. Gorsuch in 2017, Republicans abolished the limitation on Supreme Court nominees, further whittling down the scope of the filibuster.
As a result, Mr. McConnell could bring the nomination to the Senate floor and approve it with a simple majority vote. Mr. Trump signaled on Saturday that he would formally name someone to fill the vacancy in the near future.


“We have this obligation, without delay!” he tweeted, referring to the selection of justices.
It remained unclear, however, whether Mr. McConnell, himself up for re-election along with a handful of vulnerable Republican incumbents, would try to advance the nomination before Election Day. He could also opt to do so in a lame-duck congressional session after Nov. 3.

Does McConnell have the votes to confirm a nominee?

It depends.
Because Republican hold a slim majority — 53 to 47 — Democrats would need only four Republicans to join them in opposition to sink the nominee. (In the case of a tie, Vice President Mike Pence, in his role as president of the Senate, would cast the tiebreaking vote.)

Though Mr. McConnell vowed that the Senate would vote on Mr. Trump’s chosen nominee, he notably made no mention of when that would occur — a signal that he was weighing the political calculus for the handful of vulnerable Republican senators facing tough races.

Given Mr. McConnell’s decision to refuse so much as a hearing for Judge Merrick B. Garland, Mr. Obama’s pick to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016, a handful of Republicans have signaled a desire to wait until after Election Day to approve a nomination. It is unclear, however, what objections remain to approving a nomination in the lame-duck session between November and the start of a new Congress in January.

Which Republicans might defect?
Senator Susan Collins of Maine, one of the most vulnerable Republicans facing voters this year, told The New York Times this month that she would be uneasy about seating another justice in October. “I think that’s too close — I really do,” she said.




Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska told a local radio station in an interview before Justice Ginsburg’s death was announced that she would not vote to confirm a Supreme Court nominee before Election Day.

Senator Mitt Romney of Utah has not indicated how he might regard an election-season confirmation push, but he has established himself as one of the few Republicans willing to break with Mr. Trump, most notably at his impeachment trial, when he voted to convict the president and remove him from office.

Senate Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, a former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, previously said that he would not conduct Supreme Court confirmation hearings in a presidential election year given his party’s blockade of Judge Garland, but he no longer controls the panel.

Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the current judiciary panel chairman, also said in 2016 that a Supreme Court vacancy occurring in the last year of a president’s term should not be filled until after the election. But on Saturday, he reversed himself, saying the bruising battle over Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh’s confirmation had changed his mind.

“I will support President @realDonaldTrump in any effort to move forward regarding the recent vacancy created by the passing of Justice Ginsburg,” he wrote on Twitter.

What effect will the election have on the vacancy?

The proximity of the election was already weighing heavily in Republicans’ planning for the confirmation process and its timing.
Ms. Collins is facing the toughest race of her career in Maine, in part because of her 2018 vote to confirm Justice Kavanaugh, and her political challenges in a state where Mr. Trump is deeply unpopular are likely to stiffen her resistance to a quick confirmation.



On the other end of the spectrum, several Republicans, including Mr. Graham, are facing difficult re-election races in conservative states where Mr. Trump is revered by the party, and they are spoiling for an election-season fight that can demonstrate their loyalty to the president and activate conservatives.
For many Republicans, the ideal situation might be to begin the confirmation process quickly, injecting it into the political bloodstream but waiting until after Election Day — when vulnerable incumbents no longer have to worry about being cast out by angry voters — to hold a confirmation vote.

Mr. McConnell, who is also up for re-election, counseled his members to avoid stating a position on how they would handle the vacancy, as he privately gauges how to time any confirmation fight for maximum political advantage.
“This is not the time to prematurely lock yourselves into a position you may later regret,” Mr. McConnell wrote late Friday night after Justice Ginsburg’s death was announced. “I urge you all to be cautious and keep your powder dry until we return to Washington.”
Mr. McConnell’s majority could narrow even further if Mark Kelly, the Democratic nominee for Senate in Arizona, defeats Senator Martha McSally, the Republican incumbent, and is seated before January 2021. Because Ms. McSally was appointed to her seat and began serving last year, the race is a special election. Mr. Kelly could be sworn in as early as Nov. 30.

On Friday, Republican and Democratic election lawyers told The Arizona Republic that such an outcome was possible.
What if Republicans lose the White House, the Senate or both? Could they still confirm Trump’s nominee after the election?

Yes.
Congress typically reconvenes after Election Day for what is known as a lame-duck session, when lawmakers act on unfinished business before adjourning for the year. Since the newly elected members would not be seated until the new Congress convened in January, the partisan breakdown during this period would be unchanged from what it is now, meaning that Republicans would remain in control of the Senate even if they had lost their majority. Similarly, if he were to lose on Election Day, Mr. Trump would remain president until former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. was sworn in in January.
That means that even if Mr. Biden won the presidency and Democrats secured control of the Senate, Mr. McConnell would remain majority leader for the remainder of the year, with the ability to force votes provided that he maintained the support of a simple majority. Given his zeal for filling the federal courts with conservative jurists, Mr. McConnell would almost certainly avail himself of the opportunity to do so to confirm a Supreme Court justice.
Nicholas Fandos contributed reporting.

Emily Cochrane is a reporter in the Washington bureau, covering Congress. She was raised in Miami and graduated from the University of Florida. @ESCochrane
 

Non-StopJFK2TAB

Rising Star
Platinum Member
I see what you are saying, but do you really think he would bring it to a vote if he didn't think he had the votes he needed to get his nominee on the court?
I think Mitch is working under the impression he’s going to be the senate minority leader. Does he really want to agitate Ukraine Hunter’s Dad?


Do you really want to expand the district courts from 200 to 300? Do you want to expand the supreme court to 30? The Supreme Court plays far too pivotal a role in our lives. You already have the last Congress that abdicated most of its duties to the executive branch.

This era is only for serious people.
 

shonuff

Rising Star
Registered
elections have consequences

the consequence of the Left insisting on purity tests and divisive acts when long term ACCESS is at stake is why we are now in the position of having the Supreme Court ideologically shift from being even handed to being a tool for the Right / GOP

not voting in this election cedes control and now philosphy to be controlled by a party that openly courts racists - insults black people and wants to impose a cultural Apartheid and govt repression of anything that isn't Rightwing white judeochristian "values"

anyone advocating to just sit things out or to actively campaign for black people to not vote should have the ghosts of their ancestors from those enslaved to those who marched and were beaten by racists whites - they should rise up and beat the living shit out of them and drop squad their souls to a Plantation in Hell


...or Florida
 

Helico-pterFunk

Rising Star
BGOL Legend












db9f17fb2b33406f9e32debc4938dde0_sm.jpg
 

fu2

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I don't know who (or even if) but somewhere out there, a Democrat is contemplating going full throttle, fuck everything and come out swinging. Not AOC. Someone else is itching to publicly criticize the contradicting Republicans, and it could put them in the public spotlight for a future run, especially if Biden loses. This is the time to "ready the person" as we have been saying. Sadly though they are not going to be supported.

In a movie that would have been the ultimate storyline. The death of a judge leads to a rise of a leader but sadly we know where we are.

If they allow a really random person to speak at RBG funeral but they are really passionate that will be the person but the Drms just don't know how to take a moment like that. The last person who really took advantage of the spotlight was Obama at the DNC
 

crazycac50

Rising Star
Registered
you know what I've seen this and a couple of times and I got to say you either have to be really stupid or you just don't give a shit

all this talk about what could have or should have been done it didn't happen for a reason- and it seems to ignore the fact that Obama and his judge pics were blocked often by McConnell for nearly the last three years of his 2nd term-and just like Merrick Garland couldn't get an up or down vote nearly a year out it's stupidity to talk about what Ginsburg should have done and lie to the fact that McConnell has been in the seat and in control of the Senate damn near most of Obama's presidency

I'm really tired of complaining ass assholes talking about what should have been done or how there has to be tangibles or how they're going to be so edge Lord and they're just not going to vote because things can't be any worse

things are about to get a lot worse

please stop talking and rehashing about what should have been done it wasn't done and it does nothing to address the situation that exists NOW

THE SITUATION THAT EXISTS NOW IS ONE WHERE YOU EITHER LET TRUMP DECIDE THE COURSE OF THIS COUNTRY AND CERTAINLY THE COURSE OF THE JUDICIARY AND POSSIBLY A LOT OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW VOTING RIGHTS AND HEALTH CARE AND IMMIGRATION FOR DECADES

if you're going to post something post something about addressing that issue not about what went on in the past not about ridiculousness about what the Dems could have done

things are past that - that shit is over; maybe some of you " you don't need to vote/ all sides are the same/ nothing will change" assholes actually showed up and voted we wouldn't be in this position in the first place but of course that's a conversation for another time

Only an idiot doesn’t examine the the actions or inactions that have led to such a disastrous outcome. As someOne previously pointed out the democrats don’t approach the court with nearly the same focus as republicans. It is absolutely malpractice for the party that’s already down 1 vote to have the presidency for two terms and not replace it’s oldest and most sickly members. You can’t seriously argue the republicans would have blocked a supreme for multiple years when it just would have kept the status quo.
As for the future of the court we are completely at the mercy of a handful of Republicans Now. Moving forward we need our own version of the federalist society. It doesn’t help to only be concerned about the courts when Republicans are about to take further control of the Supreme Court. Meanwhile the lower courts are getting packed with unqualified candidates.
 

darth frosty

Dark Lord of the Sith
BGOL Investor
I don't know who (or even if) but somewhere out there, a Democrat is contemplating going full throttle, fuck everything and come out swinging. Not AOC. Someone else is itching to publicly criticize the contradicting Republicans, and it could put them in the public spotlight for a future run, especially if Biden loses. This is the time to "ready the person" as we have been saying. Sadly though they are not going to be supported.

In a movie that would have been the ultimate storyline. The death of a judge leads to a rise of a leader but sadly we know where we are.

If they allow a really random person to speak at RBG funeral but they are really passionate that will be the person but the Drms just don't know how to take a moment like that. The last person who really took advantage of the spotlight was Obama at the DNC
they neutered that democrat


franken_authorphoto.creditowenfranken_wide-25b4131410a5908839bad6d5beb488e3b18ea36c-s800-c85.jpg
 

BDR

BeatDownRecs
BGOL Investor
Will be a tight window because the senate is placed like on January 3rd, right? It's before POTUS. It looks like the Dems are going to retake the Senate. If Mitch pushes this through and Biden wins... I'd probably check out if the Dems control all three branches and don't pack the courts after all this fuckery.
Mark Kelly can be seated after Nov 3rd he’s going to wash McSally in AZ..

But Mitch rushing to seat a replacement only confirms to me that he knows it’s a wrap for Trump come Nov 3rd because if that wasn’t the case Mitch would say with confidence he would take up the vote in January.. I mean back in 2016 he was pretty confident in saying let the new president and the people chose.. That tells me he already knew trump was going to win
 

Non-StopJFK2TAB

Rising Star
Platinum Member
On this Emmy Sunday morning as I wait for The Watchmen to clean up tonight I am left wondering about the next season. I find it odd that a country would hinge its hope on not 1 white woman but another, fragile, older white woman. What’s more perplexing is that the older white woman remained in her post to be replaced by a white woman who was believed by white men to be the devil reincarnated. The Watchmen was brought to television by a white screen whiter. The premise was that the original superhero was a black man and it ended with the idea that a black woman will have godlike powers. She just so happens to be the granddaughter of the first superhero. I understand why the screenwriter opted not to continue. White people clearly lack an imagination. They are limited by their existence. To try to imagine a different world is impossible to them because they are incapable of such a task.
 

Spectrum

Elite Poster
BGOL Investor
So true, They are nothing but pussies. Always has been. See all this shit trump is getting away with, If a Joe becomes Pres, he won't do shit to any of them.

Man. I wouldn't be surprised if Mitch pushes this through... and the Dems then win the presidency and take over the Senate.. that the GOP/Media in some way convince the democrats the way to "save the democracy" is to not pack the courts" and not kill the filibuster. :smh:
GOP always breaks the rules and then push the Democrats to play by them.
 

shaddyvillethug

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
This is the dumbest fucking take I've read on here in a long time. You're trying to compare a man who made a movie to a person whose removal can lead to getting rid of the voters Rights Act, bringing back abortions being illegal, on and on and on.

Some of y'all really need to think before y'all speak.
What if u were aborted?
 

darth frosty

Dark Lord of the Sith
BGOL Investor
Man. I wouldn't be surprised if Mitch pushes this through... and the Dems then win the presidency and take over the Senate.. that the GOP/Media in some way convince the democrats the way to "save the democracy" is to not pack the courts" and not kill the filibuster. :smh:
GOP always breaks the rules and then push the Democrats to play by them.
119843198_3524847757554117_3655117319305795289_o.jpg
 
Top