General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBy refusing a moderate Scalia replacement now-Republicans risk getting stuck with true liberal later
The GOPs Supreme Court Gamble
By refusing a moderate Scalia replacement now, Republicans risk getting stuck with a true liberal later.
By Mark Joseph Stern
..........
Whatever the merits of the constitutional argument, the Republicans political strategy here is extremely risky. It makes some sense at first blushbetter to roll the dice that a President Rubio or Bush will get to appoint Scalias successorbut completely falls apart upon further analysis. There are serious compromise candidates on the current shortlist, extraordinarily qualified moderates like Sri Srinivasan who would likely refuse to overturn treasured conservative precedents like Heller (establishing an individual right to bear arms) and Citizens United (allowing unlimited corporate electioneering). If the Senate confirmed a Srinivasan-type now, it might have to swallow a slight liberal SCOTUS tiltbut it could, by and large, avoid dramatically altering the balance of the court.
If the Senate holds out until January 2017, however, it will be taking an astonishing gamble. Should voters send another Democrat to the White House in November, they just may turn the Senate blue again at the same time. At that point, the president could nominate a true liberal, in the vein of Justice Sonia Sotomayorand Senate Democrats could revise the nuclear option and push him or her through over staunch GOP opposition. Once a Justice Goodwin Liu takes the bench, no conservative precedent would be safe. Goodbye Heller, goodbye Citizens United, goodbye McCutcheon and Hobby Lobby and maybe even the death penalty itself.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2016/02/senate_republicans_should_compromise_on_antonin_scalia_s_replacement_or.html
-none
(1,884 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Stalling tactic by Republicans could very well backfire.
Turbineguy
(37,365 posts)When did this start?
SoLeftIAmRight
(4,883 posts)is all that need be said!
JRLeft
(7,010 posts)daleanime
(17,796 posts)but no one has ever, at least recently, accused republicans of sensible behavior.
randys1
(16,286 posts)I want a fucking liberal on that court, period
Because having a Scalia replacement on the line seems like a big way to motivate THEIR voters.
Whereas our very own Sanders supporters will quite often say "you cannot bully me into supporting a DINO by threatening me with SCOTUS"
What does the Senate map even look like?
I can think of two seats in my own awareness - Kansas and South Dakota. In neither of those races do a) Democrats have a chance of winning and b) especially since even at this late date they still do not have declared candidates.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)we were thinking about replacing our liberal judges with other liberal judges knowing that the court would still be 5-4 conservative.
Now we have a chance to replace Scalia and with a Democrat in the WH those already on the bench. Making the court a 5-4 liberal slant.
Now we have a chance to tip the court back to our side.
thesquanderer
(11,991 posts)If a Democrat wins in November and flips the Senate, they vote to confirm Obama's moderate choice,
If a Republican wins in November and keeps their party in control, they wait until January and go with the new president's pick.
starroute
(12,977 posts)Supreme Court nominations have to go through a process of hearings. And here's the Senate schedule for next fall:
Target pre-election adjournment: October 7th
Reconvene November 14
November 21 25 (Thanksgiving)
Reconvene November 28
Target sine die adjournment December 16
So they have one week in session between the election and Thanksgiving and then three weeks between Thanksgiving and Christmas. That's hardly enough time to do set up hearings, schedule witnesses, and all the rest.
And of course, Obama or the nominee could withdraw the nomination at any time.
thesquanderer
(11,991 posts)Last edited Sun Feb 14, 2016, 05:02 PM - Edit history (1)
...but defer the up/down vote until after.
Though you also add an excellent point, that the nomination could be withdrawn at any time, if it was no longer in Obama's interest to maintain it.
Shoulders of Giants
(370 posts)There is no guarantee a Democrat wins this year, especially if the Republicans manage to dump Trump and Cruz. I assume even a moderate will support Obama Care, gay marriage, and abortion rights, so that would be pretty good. It would probably guarantee all three of these will be the law of the land for decades. I'd rather take that than risk a Republican appointee.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)I hope President Obama goes for it and nominates a left leaning moderate candidate. I think the GOPers will cave.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)That will be an real quandary for them.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)Fight for what is right - a liberal justice now, later and whenever.