Imagine a world in which Barack Obama, in light of Antonin Scalia’s death, announces to the world that should he replace Scalia it would fundamentally alter the Supreme Court. The Court needs to be protected from further politicization. As a result, he would decline to pick a nominee and let the voters decide which direction to take the country.
Your analysis, Erick, is always very informative with historical background, and insightful. Thank you for maintaining this site; it is a unique perspective in the noise and confusion that twitterates our republic these days.
Is it possible that our President could do what Obama did not do-- perhaps rise to the Statesman role, and nominate a moderate judge whose studiously judicious input could pull this nation back from the precipice of desperately extremist politics on both sides.
I hope so. As a radical centrist, I plead for a moderate appointment.
And truly, that is the best outcome, if you stop and think about it, that could happen in this precarious situation.
Let's get back to the middle, like that halfback charging through the line with 4th and 1 . . .
maybe, if it turns out they try to pack the court a 6-3 conservative court can find something unconstitutional about the law, maybe . . . (3, 2, 1: HEADS EXPLODING)
The Democrats have been playing the game of controlling SCOTUS via Senate Confirmation votes for decades now. The Republicans have been slow to understand what was happening, which is why the Democrats have often had no problem getting their nominees confirmed, with these vote totals: Ginsberg 93-7; Breyer 87-9; Sotomayer: 68-31; Kagan 63-37. This is in contrast to the nearly solid front of Democrat opposition almost always presented to GOP nominees: Thomas: 52-48; Alito: 58-42; Gorsuch: 54-45, Kavanaugh 50-48. The exception to that pattern is Roberts (78:22), which suggests the Democrats knew what they were getting in Roberts and that the Republicans were either clueless, didn't care, or both. While the GOP Senate still has a group of Senators who are about as likely to vote for a Democratic nominee as a Republican nominee, the Democrats have no such group. In close confirmations, the votes for 95-100% of Senators can be predicted for Republican nominations, and it is not hard to name the group of about 5 "theoretically undecided GOP Senators" in advance.
Great article Erick! I'm totally in agreement with you! The Senate needs to do its job when the nominee is chosen by the President. A good nominee should be confirmed and that's that! Its what these folks took a vow to do, uphold the Constitution and DO THEIR JOB instead of squabbling like kids in a playground!
Your analysis, Erick, is always very informative with historical background, and insightful. Thank you for maintaining this site; it is a unique perspective in the noise and confusion that twitterates our republic these days.
Is it possible that our President could do what Obama did not do-- perhaps rise to the Statesman role, and nominate a moderate judge whose studiously judicious input could pull this nation back from the precipice of desperately extremist politics on both sides.
I hope so. As a radical centrist, I plead for a moderate appointment.
And truly, that is the best outcome, if you stop and think about it, that could happen in this precarious situation.
Let's get back to the middle, like that halfback charging through the line with 4th and 1 . . .
maybe, if it turns out they try to pack the court a 6-3 conservative court can find something unconstitutional about the law, maybe . . . (3, 2, 1: HEADS EXPLODING)
The Democrats have been playing the game of controlling SCOTUS via Senate Confirmation votes for decades now. The Republicans have been slow to understand what was happening, which is why the Democrats have often had no problem getting their nominees confirmed, with these vote totals: Ginsberg 93-7; Breyer 87-9; Sotomayer: 68-31; Kagan 63-37. This is in contrast to the nearly solid front of Democrat opposition almost always presented to GOP nominees: Thomas: 52-48; Alito: 58-42; Gorsuch: 54-45, Kavanaugh 50-48. The exception to that pattern is Roberts (78:22), which suggests the Democrats knew what they were getting in Roberts and that the Republicans were either clueless, didn't care, or both. While the GOP Senate still has a group of Senators who are about as likely to vote for a Democratic nominee as a Republican nominee, the Democrats have no such group. In close confirmations, the votes for 95-100% of Senators can be predicted for Republican nominations, and it is not hard to name the group of about 5 "theoretically undecided GOP Senators" in advance.
Great article Erick! I'm totally in agreement with you! The Senate needs to do its job when the nominee is chosen by the President. A good nominee should be confirmed and that's that! Its what these folks took a vow to do, uphold the Constitution and DO THEIR JOB instead of squabbling like kids in a playground!