Amy Coney Barrett Supreme Court

[Power T-Rev]

Rightfully? Rightfully would be having control over the senate and WH when the next vacancies come up. What you are advocating is a childish temper tantrum.

Libs hate the Constitution

 

[utvolpj]

Libs hate the Constitution

Repubs aren't exactly fans either

 

[luthervol]

Except we do know. All they did was prevent the weeks of grandstanding.

When was the last time the senate refused to hold a vote on a supreme court nomination?

 

[luthervol]

1st of all since the Dems didn't hold the senate so they had nothing stolen from them. 2nd of all your boy Harry Reid made it all possible, be mad at him.

So will you be good with holding off on a vote for 18 moths?

 

[C-south]

When was the last time the senate refused to hold a vote on a supreme court nomination?

When is the last time you had to pass a bill before you could find out was in it? When is the last time someone said “elections have consequences”?

 

[jaybird_1981]

When was the last time the senate refused to hold a vote on a supreme court nomination?

Not too long ago. I think his name was Gerrick Marland or something like that.

 

[Rickyvol77]

So will you be good with holding off on a vote for 18 moths?

If the Senate chooses to, yes

 

[luthervol]

Not too long ago. I think his name was Gerrick Marland or something like that.

Yep. It was precedent breaking.

 

[luthervol]

If the Senate chooses to, yes

How about 2 years?
How about 4 years?

 

[37L1]

How about 2 years?
How about 4 years?

Come on luther, you're slipping. I'd expect something like 2.35 years from you.

 

[Rickyvol77]

How about 2 years?
How about 4 years?

The Senate is the one tasked by the Constitution and it's their prerogative to handle it the way the majority wants to

 

[jaybird_1981]

Ha this expert witness has an action figure of RBG behind her. Who has an action figure of a supreme court justice.

 

[GAVol]

Repubs aren't exactly fans either

Careful. You’re making the assumption that they’ve actually read it.

 

[utvolpj]

Careful. You’re making the assumption that they’ve actually read it.

I heard the question yesterday to ACB about the protections of the 1st and wondered how many in that room could have answered it. I'd guess very few

 

[hog88]

So will you be good with holding off on a vote for 18 moths?

9 months. That's how long the Rs sat on Garland's.

 

[luthervol]

Come on luther, you're slipping. I'd expect something like 2.35 years from you.

That was next. Where's the line going to be drawn? Or do you stick with historical precedent and just give every president's pick a vote?
Nah........repubs insured that would never again be the case.

 

[luthervol]

9 months. That's how long the Rs sat on Garland's.

LOL...........
So you will let the repubs set the line in a way that took a pick from the dems.; mighty big of you.
Don't be dense.

 

[luthervol]

The Senate is the one tasked by the Constitution and it's their prerogative to handle it the way the majority wants to

So you're good with 4 years if that's what they wish?
Who is tasked with establishing the number of justices on the Supreme Court?
Careful now......

It's their prerogative, so whatever they decide is good.........that's your stance?

 

[1972 Grad]

So you're good with 4 years if that's what they wish?
Who is tasked with establishing the number of justices on the Supreme Court?
Careful now......

It's their prerogative, so whatever they decide is good.........that's your stance?

You have any trouble with the Republicans doing it, if they keep the Senate and Trump gets re-elected?

 

[hog88]

LOL...........
So you will let the repubs set the line in a way that took a pick from the dems.; mighty big of you.
Don't be dense.

You yourself said the Dems will retaliate so appropriate retaliation would be to sit on an R presidents SCOTUS nominee if it's 9 months out from the end of his term.

What you want to see is a nuclear response to being shot at with a BB gun.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I love how today’s dog and pony show opened with the first panel showing that ACB was impeccably qualified to be a Supreme Court Justice with no objections and the remaining “witnesses” have just lobbied back and forth with “yes but she might not rule how we want her to!”

 

[luthervol]

You have any trouble with the Republicans doing it, if they keep the Senate and Trump gets re-elected?

Of course I do. They have already stolen one seat. I'm for a fair balance (which doesn't mean a left balance). Five - four to the right would be close to fair at this point.

 

[luthervol]

You yourself said the Dems will retaliate so appropriate retaliation would be to sit on an R presidents SCOTUS nominee if it's 9 months out from the end of his term.

What you want to see is a nuclear response to being shot at with a BB gun.

Don't be dense.
The repubs picked nine months because that is what was needed to steal a pick. To be even, the dems would do whatever was needed to steal a pick back.

 

[landscapingvol]

So you're good with 4 years if that's what they wish?
Who is tasked with establishing the number of justices on the Supreme Court?
Careful now......

It's their prerogative, so whatever they decide is good.........that's your stance?

If the Democrats controlled the Senate, I would expect them to reject it. Huge difference between that and adding partisan judges simply because you didn’t control the Senate at the time of RBG’s death

 

[utvolpj]

Of course I do. They have already stolen one seat. I'm for a fair balance (which doesn't mean a left balance). Five - four to the right would be close to fair at this point.

If you submit your resume but never get an interview was that job stolen from you?