• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Scalia dead

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I doubt you can go an entire year without a replacement

This will put election turnout through the roof. it will also push Republicans to accelerate restricting voter rights.

So you too are aware of the Republican game plan. Eight years ago I wouldn't have thought the repubs would act in such a way, now? I wouldn't put it past them.
 

If this becomes an election on SCOTUS, GOP loses. Senate too. Democrats have no battleground Senate seats up in 2016. GOP will be defending a lot.
2015-12-10_Senate_Map.png
 
The government must function. Honestly this is better for you guys then if he died with the burn as prez.

I am not a Republican. I don't vote Republican either.


The Supreme Court will function just fine with 8 members. It routinely hears cases with 8 Justices. All the cases this term will have to be decided by the current 8 members. A hypothetical new Justice would only be joining in conferences to decide on taking cases, you do not need 9 Justices for that. Scalia was over emergency appeals for the 5th, the Chief Justice or another can easily step in to fulfill that role.

The Supreme Court will function just fine without an appointment.

As for a recess appointment, the GOP will continue to do what they have been doing and that is having pro forma sessions during recess. They have been doing this to prevent Obama from making recess appointments for awhile now, so there's little doubt they will stop doing so now. Not to mention, a President hasn't done a recess appointment for SCotUS since Eisenhower.
 
man, congress is probably going to do their damnest to postpone naming a replacement until the new year. I can just see every nominee Obama putting forward being shot down over and over again for months.
 
According to this, Obama can make an appointment during a Recess of 10 days or longer:

https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/c...ssociate_justice_antonin_scalia_found/czyw6l8

So it's going to happen

No its not. For the same reason Obama hasn't been able to make that many recess appointments and that is because the Senate will continue to hold pro forma sessions while in "recess". Which according to the liberal majority of the Supreme Court, is enough to block the President from making a recess appointment.

Not to mention if Obama makes a recess appointment, said recess appointment would only last until the end of the Senate session, which ends Jan 3, 2017. So a recess appointment won't do much as they as they would be required to be confirmed by the Senate.

There is zero getting around Scalia's vacancy being THE SINGLE BIGGEST ISSUE IN THIS YEARS ELECTION. The GOP is more or less damned if they do/damned if they don't. If they raise the white flag and allow Obama to appoint someone they are absolutely 100% fucked. If the use their constitutionally granted power to delay a nomination they are going to have repercussions but not nearly as bad as they will if they capitulate.
 
Last edited:
The GOP can block the nomination but it's going to cost. The President and the Dem candidates can mercilessly pummel them until election day.
 
If this becomes an election on SCOTUS, GOP loses. Senate too. Democrats have no battleground Senate seats up in 2016. GOP will be defending a lot.
2015-12-10_Senate_Map.png

Quite honestly I believe the opposite. The Republicans and their supporters know the worth of a supreme Court appointment, Democrat voters do not.

This election just became about getting out the vote. Sanders seems to be the favorite in that regard.
 
Last edited:
Quite honestly u believe the opposite. The Republicans and their supporters know the worth of a supreme Court appointment, Democrat voters do not.

That means Democrats have more to gain by their voters becoming more aware of the worth of a SCOTUS appointment.
 
The GOP can block the nomination but it's going to cost. The President and the Dem candidates can mercilessly pummel them until election day.

Do you not see that as being better than the alternative? The "conservative" base is already borderline revolting. The GOP will be in full fledged meltdown/crisis mode if they don't fight Obama on this appointment.
 
I thought McConnell was smarter. My mistake.

You are acting like He/the GOP has a politically viable alternative to fighting the nomination here.

I repeat. The GOP DOES NOT HAVE A POLITICALLY VIABLE OPTION outside of fighting the nomination process. Not fighting the nomination process hurts the GOP 100 times more than fighting the nomination.
 
Do you not see that as being better than the alternative? The "conservative" base is already borderline revolting. The GOP will be in full fledged meltdown/crisis mode if they don't fight Obama on this appointment.

I wasn't debating that. It's the least bad option out of terrible terrible options but some people may be inclined to think it will come without political cost.

I'm increasingly skeptical the GOP, as we know it, will survive this election via any course that is chosen.
 
There is zero getting around Scalia's vacancy being THE SINGLE BIGGEST ISSUE IN THIS YEARS ELECTION. The GOP is more or less damned if they do/damned if they don't. If they raise the white flag and allow Obama to appoint someone they are absolutely 100% fucked. If the use their constitutionally granted power to delay a nomination they are going to have repercussions but not nearly as bad as they will if they capitulate.

Repubs are walking into this eyes wide shut. They're vulnerable to losing their majority in the Senate.

Obama will pick an extremely well qualified & moderate nominee that they can only oppose for blatantly political reasons. It won't play well for the more vulnerable members of the caucus. Not well at all.
 
Back
Top