SCOTUS watch! Who is in the box?

[pcgeek11]

Was Dred Scott decision the last word in resolving slavery? Or some disillusioned individuals had other ideas?

Maybe "Last Word" was a poor choice of wording for what I was saying.

What I meant to say is after the SCOTUS makes a ruling it stands and there is no higher court to appeal to. Better? Things always change as in the Dred Scott case.

The seat was not "stolen" it was delayed until after the election.

 

[werepossum]

OK. But if SCOTUS majority is seen as stolen, then its decisions will be seen as illegitimate by a large part of the country. We went through this with Dred Scott, when the country stopped viewing SCOTUS decisions as the last word in resolving disputes, and started viewing them as political acts.

lol Illegitimate President, illegitimate Supreme Court, illegitimate free speech . . . Yeah, you guys are certainly fighting a valiant fight against fascism - meaning anything that doesn't go your way.

The Republicans held the Senate majority and had no obligation to approve President Obama's nomination, so the seat cannot be stolen. Come up with a suitable way to punish them for not doing their jobs and I'm on board, but you aren't entitled to your side's nominee.

 

[nickqt]

lol Illegitimate President, illegitimate Supreme Court, illegitimate free speech . . . Yeah, you guys are certainly fighting a valiant fight against fascism - meaning anything that doesn't go your way.

The Republicans held the Senate majority and had no obligation to approve President Obama's nomination, so the seat cannot be stolen. Come up with a suitable way to punish them for not doing their jobs and I'm on board, but you aren't entitled to your side's nominee.

Approve his nomination?

How about bring it up for a fucking vote for over a year?

That Supreme Court nominee was absolutely qualified, and there wasn't even a vote.

Try to keep up.

 

[MrSquished]

Trump #winning again. Gorsuch was a good pick, because realistically there is no legit opposition to him. His qualifications are impeccable and his record shows him not to be an extremist in any way. Sure, radical lefty extremists will try to smear or label him, and of course the lefties will never be happy with any nominee who isn't a leftist activist, but saying "he's a conservative" isn't a legitimate reason to say he's not qualified. Heck, many of the democrat senators already confirmed him once before, so they're going to look even more dumb if they now oppose him with no reason other than "he's not a liberal".

Will be interesting to see which way the dems go. Go the path of the lib crazies on the street and stomp their feet like children, or just confirm the guy and wait to see if the next person Trump nominates is actually unqualified. If there are legit reasons to oppose a future nominee, then they have leverage. If they throw a full tantrum over a well qualified candidate, their objections to a really unqualified candidate down the line will go nowhere. It's the old "boy who cried wolf" syndrome.

Of course you also the whole "payback for what the gop did to Garland" angle. You do that, and you just prove that yes, you are really no better than the other side, just hypocrites.

Sometimes you must go fight the enemy where he fights you

 

[compuwiz1]

Sometimes you must go fight the enemy where he fights you

Because democrats have about as much power as bringing nerf bats to gun fights right now. Tighten your lug nuts, pal. It's gonna be this way for awhile.

 

[MrSquished]

Because democrats have about as much power as bringing nerf bats to gun fights right now. Tighten your lug nuts, pal. It's gonna be this way for awhile.

Oh I'm more than prepared to fight the long game. Looking towards 2018 and 2020. In the meantime, there are options. Like Republican appointed judges fighting draconian Trumpist directives. There is still a long battle ahead grasshopper.

 

[pcgeek11]

Approve his nomination?

How about bring it up for a fucking vote for over a year?

That Supreme Court nominee was absolutely qualified, and there wasn't even a vote.

Try to keep up.

To be perfectly honest it was not over a year.

It was only 293 days, well under a year. Nominated on March 16, 2016 and it expired on January 3, 2017.

Try to be accurate.

 

[nickqt]

To be perfectly honest it was not over a year.

It was only 293 days, well under a year. Nominated on March 16, 2016 and it expired on January 3, 2017.

Try to be accurate.

Only 293 days, you're absolutely correct.

And irrelevant.

Thanks for the update.

 

[theeedude]

I think he'll get confirmed eventually, but Democrats should rough him up on the way to delegitimize the SCOTUS majority as stolen goods, and then use it to rile up their base against any actions by the Trump SCOTUS. It's good politics for the Democrats in the long run. If it really bothers them, they can always add seats to balance out all these Trump appointees when they retake power. It's no holds barred fight now, so anything goes.

 

[MrSquished]

You might as well let 2018 and the DNC go. They are toasted like a campfire marshmallow.

The rioting sealed the deal.


Oh! Going to organize better for 2018? Well, guess what? Voter fraud is going to be done and hardcore progs are a small percentage of citizens. Less than 30%

You are one of those 3 million illegals voted for Trump people? You don't need to take Prozac, you need to smoke it.

 

[pcgeek11]

Only 293 days, you're absolutely correct.

And irrelevant.

Thanks for the update.

Not irrelevant when you state that it was "over a year".

You are welcome!