Scalia is dead

[Squirrel]

Omg ... what a news day!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/13/politics/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-dies-at-79/index.html

 

Wonder if Obama will get a nom through the Senate before the elections!

[TheLeviathan]

I regularly disagreed with his politics, but it being a Supreme Court Justice is an amazing feat.  

 

His death does, however, pretty much guarantee the court shifts to the left to some degree.  Here's hoping the nominee is of the Roberts/Kennedy mold.

[drjim]

I regularly disagreed with his politics, but it being a Supreme Court Justice is an amazing feat.

 

His death does, however, pretty much guarantee the court shifts to the left to some degree. Here's hoping the nominee is of the Roberts/Kennedy mold.

Why would Obama approve of that?

[TheLeviathan]

 

Why would Obama approve of that?

 

He might not, but I'm hoping he picks a really sensible moderate.

[Craig Arko]

Call Alan Page out of retirement.

[DaveW]

"Good timing"-mike Yeo

[DaveW]

I regularly disagreed with his politics, but it being a Supreme Court Justice is an amazing feat.

 

His death does, however, pretty much guarantee the court shifts to the left to some degree. Here's hoping the nominee is of the Roberts/Kennedy mold.

Yeah agreed pretty much 100% on this. I disgareed with him on almost everything, but I respect him wholly, that's a hell of an accompolishment. (I don't have that respect for a lot of former presidents or VP bush....cough....Cheney.....Reagan cough)

[Hrbowski]

 

Omg ... what a news day!

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/13/politics/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-dies-at-79/index.html

 

Wonder if Obama will get a nom through the Senate before the elections!

I find this disgusting that you are celebrating. Absolutely Disgusting.

[formerly33]

 

I find this disgusting that you are celebrating. Absolutely Disgusting.

That comes as no surprise as your member title leads one to assume that you find everything to be not only disgusting but disgraceful as well.

[Craig Arko]

"All men have an emotion to kill; when they strongly dislike some one they involuntarily wish he was dead. I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction." - Clarence Darrow

[Squirrel]

 

I find this disgusting that you are celebrating. Absolutely Disgusting.

How am I celebrating? Did I say 'Yippee!'? Your jumping to conclusions is what is disgusting and characterizing my post as such was just wrong. It's HUGE news, HUGE ... and that was my point. And the implications are HUGE. Get a grip.

[gunnarthor]

Well, I'm a non-profit lawyer so I rarely enjoyed his decisions but I won't quite jump for glee that he's dead. 

 

But I think this fight over his replacement will be really intense. No way does the GOP majority want Obama to put a liberal in his seat and they could pass on every nominee he brings them.  It'll be fun/interesting to watch. 

[Hrbowski]

 

How am I celebrating? Did I say 'Yippee!'? Your jumping to conclusions is what is disgusting and characterizing my post as such was just wrong. It's HUGE news, HUGE ... and that was my point. And the implications are HUGE. Get a grip.

Starting a thread with the title of "Scalia is dead!" is pretty obvious. I don't recall anyone on here using exclamation points in the title of the thread discussing someone dying, such as Yogi Berra. By the way, you probably wouldn't have done that if it was Ginsburg.

[Squirrel]

Well, I'm a non-profit lawyer so I rarely enjoyed his decisions but I won't quite jump for glee that he's dead. 

 

But I think this fight over his replacement will be really intense. No way does the GOP majority want Obama to put a liberal in his seat and they could pass on every nominee he brings them.  It'll be fun/interesting to watch.

 

I agree. But I also think their delaying in a decision could impact the election in November, not in their favor. So there will be some interesting discussion and maneuvering in the near future.

[Squirrel]

Starting a thread with the title of "Scalia is dead!" is pretty obvious. I don't recall anyone on here using exclamation points in the title of the thread discussing someone dying, such as Yogi Berra. By the way, you probably wouldn't have done that if it was Ginsburg.

Quit characterizing posts to suit your agenda. I've already made my statement about it and that's the end of it.

 

It was also completely surprising, shocking even.

[Hrbowski]

 

Quit characterizing posts to suit your agenda. I've already made my statement about it and that's the end of it.

It was also completely surprising, shocking even.

I'm not. Just observing what is true, and than calling you out for it.

[nicksaviking]

This has potential to get both parties on the path back to compromise.

 

The immediate thought is Republicans will try to block until the November election. However the leaders have to know that there not only is an overwhelming chance they won't win the presidency, but lose the Senate as well. They would know at that point they may get the most liberal possible judge ever known to man. It may benefit both sides to get someone viewed as more of a moderate now.

[PseudoSABR]

 

This has potential to get both parties on the path back to compromise.

The immediate thought is Republicans will try to block until the November election. However the leaders have to know that there not only is an overwhelming chance they won't win the presidency, but lose the Senate as well. They would know at that point they may get the most liberal possible judge ever known to man. It may benefit both sides to get someone viewed as more of a moderate now.

Right Obama will nominate someone like Judge Sri Srinivasan (who in 2013 was confirmed to the DC Circuit 97-0) or Judge Merrick Garland (though he's in his 60s) both have conservative credentials but are known for being non-ideological.    As you suggest, the Republicans could play this very poorly.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I'm not. Just observing what is true, and than calling you out for it.

You're not observing anything.  You're reading into the use of exclamation marks, for chirstsakes.

 

For instance, I'm sadden by Scalia's passing, but thrilled that his ideology is off the court! 

 

It's a low blow and totally undeserved by ChiTown

[DaveW]

I'm not. Just observing what is true, and than calling you out for it.

some would agure the rights he tried to deny women, homosexuals and minorities were more disgusting then anything that was said in this thread...

[stringer bell]

Very influential and very conservative. As mentioned above, Obama can nominate a moderate and the calculus of the court will still be changed dramatically. Seriously, I don't think there is a single person who Obama could nominate who could win over all the Democrats and 14 Republicans.

 

Make no mistake, Scalia's death is a major blow to Republicans. They will be on the spot for Obama's nominee, plus no person alive can come on the court and be as influential and conservative as Scalia was. His influence was more than one conservative vote on issues.

[drjim]

While true that I didn't necessarily agree with much of what he did and that can be analyzed at a later time, I do always pause to acknowledge someone who honorably served the country as long as he did. I do have respect for honest idealogues.

 

9 kids, 30something grand kids, a full life until your late 70s, and dying in your sleep while still relatively healthy and after a night of bird hunting. Nice way to go out.

[Squirrel]

While true that I didn't necessarily agree with much of what he did and that can be analyzed at a later time, I do always pause to acknowledge someone who honorably served the country as long as he did. I do have respect for honest idealogues.

9 kids, 30something grand kids, a full life until your late 70s, and dying in your sleep while still relatively healthy and after a night of bird hunting. Nice way to go out.

Well, not sure how healthy he was, really, given his weight and stress of the job. But yeah, nice way to go.

[glunn]

 

 Seriously, I don't think there is a single person who Obama could nominate who could win over all the Democrats and 14 Republicans.

 

 

Sadly, I believe that this is almost certainly correct.  Nonetheless, I think that Obama should offer a list of 5 moderates, and make the radicals on both sides pay a price if they urinate on the process.

[DaveW]

Sadly, I believe that this is almost certainly correct. Nonetheless, I think that Obama should offer a list of 5 moderates, and make the radicals on both sides pay a price if they urinate on the process.

Why 5? Just nominate one moderate. If the GOP blocks it, it completely loses them the Independent vote overall, not only for the POTUS but for the senate as well.

 

(Personally I prefer a liberal court overall, but think it's important we get a lot of moderates on as well)

[glunn]

 

Why 5? Just nominate one moderate. If the GOP blocks it, it completely loses them the Independent vote overall, not only for the POTUS but for the senate as well.

(Personally I prefer a liberal court overall, but think it's important we get a lot of moderates on as well)

 

The reason for 5 is that it would show a greater willingness to compromise.  I would rather have the Republicans have to argue that 5 people are bad than 1 person is bad.  On reflection, I might even go with 10, with a focus on candidates who are not registered with either party.

 

A more creative solution would be to persuade Ginsberg to retire, with a deal in place to replace Scalia with a moderate right wing justice who is at least 70 years old to continue Scalia's legacy and Ginsberg with a moderate liberal who is 50 years old and in perfect health.  This would be a compromise that would hedge the risk for both sides as to what will happen after November.

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

While true that I didn't necessarily agree with much of what he did and that can be analyzed at a later time, I do always pause to acknowledge someone who honorably served the country as long as he did. I do have respect for honest idealogues.

9 kids, 30something grand kids, a full life until your late 70s, and dying in your sleep while still relatively healthy and after a night of bird hunting. Nice way to go out.

Well said.

[DaveW]

The reason for 5 is that it would show a greater willingness to compromise. I would rather have the Republicans have to argue that 5 people are bad than 1 person is bad. On reflection, I might even go with 10, with a focus on candidates who are not registered with either party.

 

A more creative solution would be to persuade Ginsberg to retire, with a deal in place to replace Scalia with a moderate right wing justice who is at least 70 years old to continue Scalia's legacy and Ginsberg with a moderate liberal who is 50 years old and in perfect health. This would be a compromise that would hedge the risk for both sides as to what will happen after November.

 

 

I'm very naive in this topic so sorry if this is a dumb question: but can Obama even nominate 5 and be like: hey, you guys choose?

 

Even thought it benefits my tilts now (liberal Supreme Court) part of me wonders if those spots should be limited by some

Term. I'm thinking 15-20 years overall? Maybe after 10 years you have to be re-affirmed? Just for some basic checks/balances and because the country as a whole changes a ton every 15-20 years?

[glunn]

 

I'm very naive in this topic so sorry if this is a dumb question: but can Obama even nominate 5 and be like: hey, you guys choose?

Even thought it benefits my tilts now (liberal Supreme Court) part of me wonders if those spots should be limited by some
Term. I'm thinking 15-20 years overall? Maybe after 10 years you have to be re-affirmed? Just for some basic checks/balances and because the country as a whole changes a ton every 15-20 years?

Obama could nominate only one at a time.  But before he nominates he can offer whatever list he wants and ask for a response from the Senate.

[DaveW]

Obama could nominate only one at a time. But before he nominates he can offer whatever list he wants and ask for a response from the Senate.

I have heard some rumblings about nominating Obama as a Supreme Court justice(down the road)

 

I am a big Obama fan, but am I wrong to think this is a little odd? He obviously hasn't been a judge, and hasn't dedicated his life to law etc

 

As much as I think he would be a "fair voice" I sorta think it would be odd to give him

A job where he has never been a judge before.

 

Thoughts?