Senator Markey says Democrats will restore 60-vote Supreme Court filibuster

[PoliticAverse]

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) pledged Monday that Democrats will restore a 60-vote filibuster threshold for Supreme Court nominees if they regain the majority in the upper chamber.

"We will restore the 60-vote margin. We will ensure that for the Supreme Court there is that special margin that any candidate has to reach," he told MSNBC.

He said making Supreme Court candidates get 60 votes "is essential to ensuring that our country has a confidence in those people who are nominated, rather than just someone who passes a litmus test."

Markey's comments come after Republicans triggered the "nuclear option" last week to confirm Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, who took the judicial oath on Monday.

Read the rest at: https://origin-nyi.thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/328161-dem-senator-democrats-will-restore-60-vote-supreme-court-filibuster

Edited to add link to youtube video of his MSNBC interview...

[samnsara]

1. Gorsuch will always be the judge who got in....

...by the 'special class' promotion...

[gratuitous]

10. Justice Affirmative Action Hire

I'm calling him that every chance I get.

[Initech]

46. Ooh, I like it!

[Johonny]

20. Dems should remove him. seriously they should run on that.

Particularly after his first few horrible decisions go down. Republicans violated the rules so we will impeach him.

[ProudLib72]

28. I got laughed at for saying this

And, seriously, you have to ask yourself if doing so would undermine credibility of the SCOTUS and Senate. If it becomes a pissing match, then they remove all of our favorites. Better to let Gorsuch stand for now. He didn't really do anything wrong. He just got placed by a bunch of rethugs who need to be removed.

[sharedvalues]

35. Of course he should be removed. It's Garland's seat.

[athena]

40. He could have declined the nomination.

Anyone with any integrity would have done so, given the unfairness of what was done to Merrick Garland.

[ProudLib72]

52. Yeah, he sure as hell should have declined

But he didn't. Still, that is not an impeachable offense.

[athena]

53. I don't think he should be impeached.

Nonetheless, not doing something illegal does not equate to not doing anything wrong. He is dead wrong in my book, and will therefore forever have an asterisk next to his name and go down in history as a despicable person who took advantage of an unfair situation to advance his own career.

ETA: I see that you were responding to someone who said he should be impeached.

[ProudLib72]

54. No, I understood you weren't calling for impeachment

I was sort of half responding to you and to the previous post. Sorry that was a little confusing.

[mythology]

47. That would be a horrible idea

It was dumb when Roosevelt proposed stacking the court. Impeachment is reserved for high crimes committed by the individual being impeached. Lowering that standard doesn't help matters.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

2. No comment.

[old guy]

8. Absolute bewilderment prevents me from making a comment.

[virtualobserver]

3. Democrats already vowing to give up their power if they ever get it back

[Me.]

4. Honestly

And what's to stop the Cons from changing the rule yet again when they are able?

[renate]

5. as my FIL used to say when "we" was used improperly

"You got a turd in your back pocket?"

I'm honestly not sure why he used that phrase, but he would say it when someone else would speak as if they were talking for more than just themselves.

Is this a decision that Senator Markey can make for the entire Democratic caucus?

[virtualobserver]

9. no, but it makes for a great quote for Republicans to use.....

if we retake the Senate.

[dalton99a]

24. +1

[AgadorSparticus]

59. Exactly what i was thinking. Wth?!?!?!!

[Proud Liberal Dem]

6. Eh.......

I see what he's trying to do here and I applaud the integrity but I can already see that this isn't going to work well. When we get back in the WH and Republicans are in the minority in the Senate, they will ensure that no Democratic President gets to make a SCOTUS nomination via the Filibuster, but then they will go "Nuclear" again once they are back in the majority in the Senate. The filibuster for SCOTUS nominees has now been broken and will not ever be fixed unless both parties agree that it will be respected and, unfortunately, there is absolutely no reason to trust that the GOP will hold up their end of the bargain.

[awesomerwb]

7. Well, what's new.

Same old, same old.

Spines for sale!! With that logic, good luck getting re-elected Markey. Spineless candidates not accepted anymore.

[NewDealProgressive]

11. We just don't want it the way the right wants it.

They would kill their grandmother to get their legislation passed, to get their judges confirmed, to get their cabinet appointed. Our side always wants to compromise be bipartisan and appear civil. We're idiots who will always lose by doing such things.

Just wait until they nuke legislation, it'll be good times then, we'll never get back into power.

[Mr. Sparkle]

12. Senator Markey needs to sit down and

[CrispyQ]

13. And the repubs are chortling.

Do the dems ever learn?

[Bettie]

14. That is quite possibly the dumbest statement I've read today

Really, Senator Markey? You want to ensure that Dems never, ever get to confirm a SCOTUS pick ever again?

Because they won't. Ever.

[madokie]

15. I like Ed

And I agree with him on this.

fuck the turtlepissant and everything he stands for

[PoliticAverse]

16. Video of his MSNBC interview...

[LiberalLovinLug]

17. What happened to stopping taking a knife to a gun fight?

Look, Dems don't want to fight dirty, I don't want to fight dirty. I think most of us center to left hate to have to get dirty. Mostly we haven't had to because the facts are always so damning to the other side we didn't have to. But we live in an alt-truth present where we have to at the very least use any weapon they use against us, against them.

THEN and only then should we restore the old process back.

As someone upthread said, whats to stop the Republicans in the future, in a situation where Dems have a 59 senator advantage of not only refusing to vote in favour, or worse, if at an even later date after that restorative change was made, when they may again hold the presidency and barely over 50 Senators, what is to stop them simply once again changing the law. Because you know they will.

[ck4829]

22. It's not even a knife anymore. It's like a plate of cookies.

[Dawson Leery]

33. I stand by my statement from earlier.

If Ginsberg and Kennedy are replaced, I want Democrats to rebalance the court by added members after 2020.

[Bettie]

45. Now they are taking a box of ammunition

just in case Turtle Boy needs to reload.

[LiberalLovinLug]

49. lol

[Ohioblue22]

18. smh at the dems. our party is never happy unless it's screwing itself out of victory

[Tatiana]

19. Still bringing knives to a gunfight, I see.

We just don't learn. We need some streetfighters. Not gentlemen.

The times are calling for something different. I wish some of the members of our party would catch up.

[ck4829]

21. I don't even think that fits anymore

The right is waging war with the goal of erasing the left from the discourse, Democrats want to play nice and share.

[NewJeffCT]

60. Yes

Bringing a squirt gun when the other side is nuking you.

[roamer65]

23. Fuck that.

[dalton99a]

25. Truly idiotic plan.

[uponit7771]

26. Sigh... these guys are so fuckin inspiring ... please continue to pick up our teeth off the ground

... after KGOP knock em out of our faces

[mvd]

27. I want it back badly, but..

the Repukes are not like a normal party. They play dirty, and we have to adjust or we will continue to be taken advantage of.

[LenaBaby61]

29. You gotta be kidding. Dems ceding power back to the thuglicans after Gorsuch?

I can see myself turning Independent (No voter preference) here in California. My friends are LIVID over what Markey said

Looks like that knife being bought to a gun fight is a permenent PART of the Dem party forever guys.

[Bleacher Creature]

30. Seriously? Are they going to voluntarily wear "kick me" signs too?

[Dawson Leery]

31. And I will support a primary challenger to he in 2020.

This Massachusetts, we need solid liberals in the Senate from the state.

[Baitball Blogger]

32. Democrats can always be counted on to shoot themselves in the foot.

[bluecollar2]

34. Dear Senator Markey

Fuck you...

You may be able to weather the screwing being put to working Americans as a result of your position.

The rest of aren't...

[RAFisher]

36. I want to hear talk of expanding the court to 11 seats, not this backwards bullshit.

The GOP blew up the rule book. As far as I'm concerned it's Mad Max rules now. Congress can change the size of the court. Make the 2020 election about expanding the court.

[Warren DeMontague]

37. What the FUCK.

[Demonaut]

38. and take my wallet

[Warpy]

39. Um, Markey? You know I love you but for gawd's sake, man, get a grip!

If the Democrats find themselves in a position to bring it back before McConnell and other abusers of that rule are long dead, turned to dust, and forgotten, it will be the second biggest mistake the Democratic Party has ever made.

It should stay gone for at least 30 years and quite possibly 50. It will take history writers that long to vilify the right wingers who drove our country to fascism using it and for whatever party to hosts like minded men in the future to have forgotten how to do it.

No. Just no.

[Warren DeMontague]

61. Next time we get the chance we stick the most liberal and healthy 18 year old we can find

On that court.

And we do that for every fucking vacancy we have the opportunity to fill.

"Civility" had a chance, his name was Merrick Garland.

Fuck this noise. We dont give them back the filibuster when we have the majority.

[Warpy]

64. Oh, make sure s/he is at least 30

We need to get them through law school first and have at least a little experience.

[Foamfollower]

41. He's up for re-election in 2020. Time to start looking for a primary opponent.

The man must learn this level of stupidity cannot be tolerated.

[DefenseLawyer]

42. The donor class doesn't want a liberal Supreme Court

Here endeth the lesson.

[tritsofme]

43. The junior senator from Massachusetts knows not of what he speaks.

This isn't gonna happen.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

44. sounds dumb. If we regain power - screw them- block every wingnut they put up. nt

[PdxSean]

48. HEFTY, HEFTY, HEFTY! wimpy, wimpy, wimpy.

I initially thought it was Senator Merkley from Oregon. Almost had a fucking aneurism.

Anyway. Y'all remember that old hefty bag commercial? Nuff said.

[PoliticAverse]

50. Merkley and Elizabeth Warren tried to bring back the talking filibuster...

back when Obama was President and the Republicans were stalling everything.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/15/democrats-filibuster-reform_n_2141382.html

[Warren DeMontague]

62. No, Jeff is 180 degrees from this dude.

Thank God.

[Agschmid]

51. Stupidest idea ever.

[mr_liberal]

55. How about restore it AFTER they match Gorsuch and whoever else Trump gets to nominate. nm

[oasis]

57. I have a two word response.

Fuck that.

[Jonny Appleseed]

58. We should be focus grouping how voters will react if we tell them we'll tear Gorsuch from his

throne when we regain control. I'm not sure if it would a net negative. It could work to our advantage.

I wish someone would have the spine to say "we need to get that fuckface out of there. He is not a justice of the people. No compromise, because our democracy already has been."

But jeez Ed, I'm embarrassed for my state.

[Vinca]

63. Oh, now that makes me want to vote Democratic. Caving before there is the capacity to cave.

What is wrong with these people?????? Where has singing kumbayah gotten them?????? Democrats need to play hardball or go the fuck home.