Is conservative opposition to filling Scalia vacancy like FDR's Court-packing controversy?

Sen. Warren has awesomely invited the GOP to reread the Constitution.

Senator McConnell is right that the American people should have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court justice. In fact, they did — when President Obama won the 2012 election by five million votes.

Article II Section 2 of the Constitution says the President of the United States nominates justices to the Supreme Court, with the advice and consent of the Senate. I can’t find a clause that says “…except when there’s a year left in the term of a Democratic President.”

14 Likes

Imagine Justice Kelly is nominated. She was previously confirmed by the Senate.

By delaying and/or rejecting Justice Kelly, the GOP will devote a year to further splitting it’s warring factions by sitting on it’s hands. It would transparently cheat to shut down a core constitutional duty.

The social conservative Cruz-ish factions of the GOP will want to reject her which foregrounds their unpopular “war on women” and related culture war issues. They will pray publicly, make intemperate remarks about civilization ending and demonize opponents. Their visibility will rally progressives.

The so-called establishment GOP will recognize that ignoring the Constitution so women’s clinics in Texas can stay closed and undocumented people can be harassed will further alienate nearly everyone who isn’t a straight white man over age 45. They will pull back from the conservatives more than they already have.

Like FDR in 1937, the GOP can have it’s constitutional crisis. It’s remaining political momentum will stall.

1 Like

Another interesting article.

I was wondering if there was a well qualified LGBT candidate, sounds Iike there may be. The more diversity, the better, I say. But maybe an option for Sanders/Clinton post the election?

4 Likes

What a great James Hohmann article for WaPo!

He points out that Sen. McConnell’s betting the Senate GOP majority stalling POTUS’s SCOTUS nominee “could backfire badly.” It’s less of a “bet” and more that he’s having to walk the plank.

As they do, conservatives think the issue is good for them too and “they don’t think independents will really care all that much.”

The social conservatives have been driving constituencies out of the GOP with their cultural warfare. Now they’ve been invited to prime time.

5 Likes

WHo’s going to hold them accountable? THe past not just eight years but sixteen have shown that their voting base is both gerrymandered and crazy enough to not care on little triflings like constiutional responsibility so long as their guy wins.

2 Likes

Draft Warren for SCOTUS

4 Likes

Yes, that’s the point.

Most U.S. voters care less than ever about the culture war wedge issues of the 80s and 90s.

But the social conservatives inside the GOP care more than ever about those issues.

Their positions on abortion and police violence and immigration and gay marriage have grown too unpopular to unite the GOP around a single candidate, let alone a majority of U.S. voters.

Like FDR’s New Deal Coalition in 1937, the Reagan Coalition is cracking apart over a SCOTUS fight.

2 Likes

Which means 95% of GOP supporters will never read it, much less consider the editorial on its merits.

4 Likes

I would be very surprised if the nominee comes from the Ninth Circuit. And I’d be even more surprised if a nominee from the Ninth Circuit gets confirmed for SCOTUS.

1 Like

The author of that piece has subsequently changed their mind, too.

Although (speaking as a foreign type who’s learnt more about the SCOTUS over this weekend than I ever knew before) I don’t think that Loretta Lynch is more likely.

2 Likes

Yeah, those are throwaway candidates. Maybe used to get POTUS’s preferred nominee nominated? Or maybe Watford is his preferred nominee, so he’ll throw someone else under the bus? That’s the only way he’d get the appointment is if he’s nominated after a protracted battle over someone else, who is really controversial.

However, the Ninth Circuit is generally viewed with acrimony by the right. Or so I’ve been led to believe.

2 Likes

Not that Obama should use Scalia’s death to troll the GOP, but you know he’s going to propose someone eminently qualified whose rejection by the GOP is going to damage them with key demographics.

8 Likes

That would be…awesome!

1 Like

What can POTUS do?

The evangelical GOP members alienate every other group. Now they’re driving the GOP bus.

They don’t take yes for an answer on healthcare. They don’t agree with each other.

The GOP evangelicals are having a toddler tantrum in Target after too many Circus Peanuts. :smiley_cat:

4 Likes

I should let you know that they’ve already enacts laws to prevent minorities from voting so that they can remain in power; so the GOP rejecting the nominee for SCOTUS won’t hurt them since they’re much in control over voting

1 Like

OTOH, Oliver Roeder thinks the 4-4 split could be good news for voting rights activists. :slightly_smiling:

1 Like

your genteel british manners are showing.

7 Likes

Mr. Tomasky found the nut of the matter.

[The “inclusive” GOP opted to] convert a howling xenophobe into their front-runner …

He forgot to mention bible-thumping, sexist and homophobe.

Here is Wonkette quoting John Dickerson from CBS trying to stop Sen. Cruz from brazenly lying about whether Justice Kennedy was confirmed in an election year. (He was.)

CRUZ: Well, we have 80 years of precedent of not confirming Supreme Court justices in an election year. And let me say, Justice Scalia…

DICKERSON: Just can I — I’m sorry to interrupt, were any appointed in an election year or is that just there were 80 years…

CRUZ: Eighty years of not confirming. For example, LBJ nominated Abe Fortas. Fortas did not get confirmed. He was defeated.

DICKERSON: But Kennedy was confirmed in ’88.

CRUZ: No, Kennedy was confirmed in ’87…

DICKERSON: He was appointed in ’87.

CRUZ: He was appointed in…

DICKERSON: … confirmed in ’88. That’s the question, is it appointing or confirming, what’s the difference?

CRUZ: In this case it’s both. But if I could answer the question…

DICKERSON: Sorry, I just want to get the facts straight for the audience. But I apologize.

3 Likes

You have to troll without making it look like you’re trolling.

Troll casual.

7 Likes

It hasn’t happened often, but it has in my (our?) life time under Reagan with Robert Bork (BORK, BORK, BORK, BORK)… I wouldn’t underestimate the stubborness of the GOP right now. They think they have the country behind them, but it’s just a vocal minority (with tons of overlap from people who hate Beyonce right now).

You have more faith in our system than I do right now! :wink:

4 Likes