uh, Biden called for a compromise pick in that speech...
"I believe that so long as the public continues to split its confidence between the branches, compromise is the responsible course both for the White House and for the Senate,"
"If the President consults and cooperates with the Senate or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter. But if he does not, as is the President's right, then I will oppose his future nominees as is my right."
I agree with him...and that's what Obama is doing...dudes considered a moderate that GOPers voted to nominate.
(03-16-2016 11:06 AM)DaSaintFan Wrote: I do think they'll give him a hearing, but I don't think they'll ever actually vote on the nomination to be honest.
Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2 gives the Senate Advice and Consent on SCOTUS nominees.
There is no Constitutional requirement to do so.
The Senate can hold a hearing or not hold a hearing and are still upholding the Constitutional issue.
"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."
(03-16-2016 11:16 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2 gives the Senate Advice and Consent on SCOTUS nominees.
There is no Constitutional requirement to do so.
The Senate can hold a hearing or not hold a hearing and are still upholding the Constitutional issue.
"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments."
Funny...I don't see anything about the nomination in the final year of a two-term president when the other party has a majority in the senate.
IMO, the GOP is setting a horrible precedent and they will regret it. Especially when the pressure mounts and they lose seats.
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2016 11:19 AM by Redwingtom.)
The Court has operated in the past with as little as 6 judges.
It can go on just fine with 8 until there is a new president.
Please cry to Biden, Schumer, Obama (with his filibuster of a nominee) and Harry Reid.
They should've kept their traps shut and you'd have a leg to stand on.
Their words have come back to bite them in the backside.
(This post was last modified: 03-16-2016 12:08 PM by mptnstr@44.)
