Latest Breaking News

FBaggins

(26,735 posts)

41. Not four of them

Fri Apr 22, 2022, 12:15 PM

Apr 2022

So why didn't Flake force a vote?

Because he would lose it?

In the example above, Manchin could not force a vote if there were 54 Democratic senators and the rest stood with the majority leader.

And it's a stretch to even characterize Flake as "wanting a vote on Garland". In the weeks after the nomination he said that they should vote on Garland IF it looked like Clinton was going to win the election (because Clinton's selection would surely be to the left of Garland) - and then in October he made statements that he thought it was now clear that Clinton was going to win so they should consider moving forward with the confirmation. That isn't an indication that HE would be willing to buck the party on the issue... let alone that three other senators agreed with him.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

42 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Biden Signs Jackson's Supreme Court Commission Early in Unusual Move [View all] TheProle Apr 2022 OP

Great, now if he can find a way to remove some other ones early that would be better bucolic_frolic Apr 2022 #1

Lock it in! mahina Apr 2022 #2

Yeah, you never know when they might sue, or try to overthrow SCOTUS or hire Mitch bucolic_frolic Apr 2022 #3

Excellent! BumRushDaShow Apr 2022 #4

Court packing! DO EEEEET! Novara Apr 2022 #5

I kind of wonder what would happen if Breyer decided to change his mind GregariousGroundhog Apr 2022 #8

He can't Polybius Apr 2022 #18

Wasn't McConnell in violation of that law Novara Apr 2022 #22

Now because the timing melm00se Apr 2022 #24

Yes, you are right! raging moderate Apr 2022 #25

"Shall appoint" is preceded by "Consent of the Senate" FBaggins Apr 2022 #26

No. The number of slots didn't change FBaggins Apr 2022 #27

Nope Polybius Apr 2022 #31

That last part isn't true FBaggins Apr 2022 #34

Sure it is Polybius Apr 2022 #37

Nope. He has no such power FBaggins Apr 2022 #38

There were Republicans who wanted a vote on Garland, such as Flake from AZ Polybius Apr 2022 #39

Not four of them FBaggins Apr 2022 #41

Gotcha, I misread Polybius Apr 2022 #42

So this may be a dumb question but... GregariousGroundhog Apr 2022 #6

The judiciary act of 1869 sets the number at 9. unblock Apr 2022 #9

FDR and his advisers sure thought he could, KPN Apr 2022 #15

It's set by law. Congress could change it, but this congress won't. unblock Apr 2022 #16

FDR's plan required Congress to pass a bill implementing it. n/t PoliticAverse Apr 2022 #21

No. The number is fixed by law at 9 and she's not an associate justice until she's sworn in anyway. PoliticAverse Apr 2022 #20

No - the advisory opinion makes clear that she can't be seated until he retires FBaggins Apr 2022 #29

Could Breyer be ill or something? Dunno. Glad Justice-To-Be Jackson is set! Akoto Apr 2022 #7

I think this has more to do with Biden's health. Mawspam2 Apr 2022 #10

He just announced he's running in 2024. Why do you think it has to do with his health? eggplant Apr 2022 #11

He has been Rebl2 Apr 2022 #14

Not just his health FBaggins Apr 2022 #28

Another informed, informative post. Thanks, F. :) Hortensis Apr 2022 #33

Thank goodness mahina Apr 2022 #12

My thought Rebl2 Apr 2022 #13

I think it had much more to do with the 50-50 Senate. Ace Rothstein Apr 2022 #17

Huh? C Moon Apr 2022 #19

Maybe Biden is sending a message to Congress Novara Apr 2022 #23

It will need 60 votes because some Democratic Senators won't agree to override the filibuster. n/t PoliticAverse Apr 2022 #32

The open question here (based on the cited opinion) FBaggins Apr 2022 #30

I think it says she could take her seat NOW - 10 justices. Captain Zero Apr 2022 #35

Nope. See #29 above for the actual text FBaggins Apr 2022 #36

Good. dalton99a Apr 2022 #40