HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Chief Justice Roberts den...

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 03:07 PM

Chief Justice Roberts denies bid to force Senate action on Garland nomination

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON — Chief Justice John Roberts has denied a lawyer’s bid to get the Supreme Court to force the Senate to consider the high court nomination of Judge Merrick Garland.

Roberts on Monday did not comment in rejecting an emergency appeal by lawyer Steven Michel of New Mexico. Michel argued that Senate Republicans’ obstruction of President Barack Obama’s nomination of Garland violates Michel’s rights as a voter under the provision of the Constitution that provides for popular election of senators.

Lower courts had previously dismissed Michel’s case. He filed his suit in the summer, well before the election of Donald Trump seemingly doomed Garland’s nomination.

Meanwhile, Garland soon will resume hearing cases on the federal appeals court in Washington, where he serves as chief judge.

Read more: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/chief-justice-roberts-denies-bid-force-senate-action-garland-nomination/

10 replies, 3486 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 10 replies Author Time Post
Reply Chief Justice Roberts denies bid to force Senate action on Garland nomination (Original post)
Jose Garcia Dec 2016 OP
yeoman6987 Dec 2016 #1
bucolic_frolic Dec 2016 #2
cbdo2007 Dec 2016 #3
melm00se Dec 2016 #4
bucolic_frolic Dec 2016 #5
melm00se Dec 2016 #7
bucolic_frolic Dec 2016 #8
onenote Dec 2016 #9
turbinetree Dec 2016 #6
onenote Dec 2016 #10

Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 03:20 PM

1. I mean I want garlin voted on but the Supreme Court?

 

That's grasping at straws big time. That would have been horrible. That could have opened up a big can of crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 03:33 PM

2. Roberts can tweak anything to suit his Republican principles and principals

Voters do vote for active representation. Obstruction is part of that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 03:43 PM

3. Lol it has nothing to do with Roberts being repube...

He has no power to force the Senate to do anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 03:49 PM

4. 2 things

1) the case was dismissed because "Mr. Michel has not shown that he has suffered an individualized injury such that he can maintain this action."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp-content/uploads/sites/47/2016/11/4911949-0-19994-mem-opinion-granting-motn-to-dismiss.pdf

2) The Constitution does not require that the Senate give advice and consent just that the President cannot take certain actions without that advice and consent. So the Court cannot (and should not) use its power to force action upon a co-equal branch of government.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melm00se (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 04:09 PM

5. So at this point

Obama has waited 9 months for disapproval and hasn't heard any

Does he take one of the loopholes some have talked about?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bucolic_frolic (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 07:17 PM

7. the only option was a recess appointment

but the president's power for recess appointment powers were significantly restricted in a 9-0 (non-partisan decision) Supreme Court ruling in 2014.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melm00se (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 08:08 PM

8. A second option was mentioned recently

at the beginning of the new session, when the floor is handed first
to the minority ... but it would create an uproar

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to melm00se (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 09:45 PM

9. He lacked standing just like the birthers lacked standing

It was a frivolous claim from the start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 04:39 PM

6. Roberts is a racist and he is going to swear in a racist's, look at what he did on voting rights

and as for not looking into this constitutional questions, he should be impeached, he sure can decide if a building has the same protections as a human being.

This political "normalization" by fascist's is just BS, whoever this loser 62 million( serial predator) to 65 million of the votes puts before the senate he is not a legitimate judge to sit on that bench, obstruction is still obstruction and every republican is a fascist----------the moment they denied that vote for the presidents nominee that was the day and time this country turned into what's called a third world country, lock, stock, and barrel, and they own it lock, stock, and barrel and whole bunch of people are going to get screwed, worse



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jose Garcia (Original post)

Mon Dec 19, 2016, 09:49 PM

10. Under Supreme Court practice, he could renew his application in front of any justice of his choice

So let's see if he does that and what the result is.

(Clue: He probably won't and if he does, he will get turned down again. And if tries again after that, he'll get turned down again, until every justice has turned him down.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread