Look what happens when I take an afternoon off to visit with my parents and cousins and uncles. Antonin Scalia dies suddenly on a ranch in Texas and all hell breaks loose.
Long time readers of this blog know that I have a policy of speaking no ill of the dead for a decent interval after their passing, even when we’re talking about horrible people.
My policy stands, which in this case means that I can’t say virtually anything at all.
My relatives asked me what it means. I told them that it meant that the next president would select his replacement.
Of course, President Obama has the constitutional duty to name his replacement, and I’m sure he’ll nominate someone, perhaps in consultation with Clinton and Sanders. But the Republicans have already announced that no nominee is acceptable. I knew they would do that the moment that I heard that Scalia is dead.
We’ll try to shame them, but we all know that they’re shameless.
I’ll have more to say later.
I have no such policy. I’m glad hes dead too bad it dudnt happen before the clean power decision.
Immigration, abortion so much more. The ammount of damage roberts can do has been limited so much. I hope both dem presidential candidates emphasize how important it is for the things they want that they have a left leaning court and that means it is imperative to vote. In the meantime on controversial cases the court is now gridlocked. Eveeytime democrats and obama must emphasize this tie is the fault of Mitch McConnell.
To the best of my knowledge, this means that the Texas stay of Obama’s unconstitutional overreach on amnesty will stay in place.
But they cant rule against it now. Which would be a big blow to executive power.
Shameless, but it rather changes some of the narratives of the election. I’m guessing it may have a significant impact on some candidacies, down-ticket races and turnout. Hard to game this out from here but equally likely that the implications are widespread and significant.
That was my first reaction, but as the day wore on I thought it might not be a drastic change for the election (the cases now before the court are another story). The main factor for the election will be that it gives everyone a chance to gauge how the candidates respond, as we’ll do with any unexpected event through the year. An actual SC opening will give added urgency to the general election, but both sides were pretty fired up already and the opening will be old news long before November.
Good news for Hillary Clinton.
I’ll say it for you. I’m down in SC visiting my gf for Valentine’s and the long weekend. Combine that with his death, and it’s like one of the best weekends of my life. I was in a coffee shop when I heard. The caffeine plus adrenaline was a lot to deal with at one time lol
Also while down here I saw a “Nurses for Bernie” bus.
It’d be one thing if they just said, “We’re going to block and stonewall Obama’s nomination of another Justice, because he’ll appoint a liberal one and we’re going to use whatever means in our possession to prevent that because we can, in order to advance our partisan conservative beliefs.”
(It’s still bad, but it’d at least be refreshing, like that comment in the Fall about using the Benghazi committee to curtail Hillary’s nomination chances.)
But instead we get this business about “the post-legal nature of this Presidency” and some kind of nonsense about “the people must choose” and etc. It’s so tiring (especially when TV news shows so many ill-informed, lazy people at the rallies and caucuses just stupidly repeating this kind of drivel).
The last time there was a nominee whose Senate confirmation process carried into a Presidential election year was in 1988, after Anthony Kennedy’s nomination was announced by President Reagan in November 1987. His hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee were held on December 14th, 1987. The Committee voted out his nomination unanimously on January 27, 1988, and the full Senate approved his seating on the Court on February 3, 1988, in a 97-0 vote.
The last time a open Supreme Court seat sat open for the length of time the Republicans are planning here is in 1844-45. President Tyler, who only ran as the Vice-Presidential nominee and gained the Presidency when President Harrison died, was the last President who was treated in this way by the Senate. Let’s see if that gets reported.
John Dickinson is moderating tonight’s GOP Presidential debate. Both Rubio and Cruz incorrectly stated that it has been 80 years since the Senate has approved a Supreme Court nominee during a Presidential election year. Dickinson correctly stated that the Senate approved Kennedy’s nomination in 1988…
…and the audience booed him.
The People did choose. By the millions when they elected this president.
I just watched Pete Williams, NBC News reporter on the Justice Department, avoid a question about the nearly unprecedented period of time the President would be denied the opportunity for a fair hearing for a SCOTUS nominee by saying “the past doesn’t count in this instance” because Bork.
I wish I was kidding. I’m not kidding.
This is a good time to note that Pete Williams was Dick Cheney’s press secretary when Dick was in Congress and when he was the Secretary of Defense.
The Liberal Media strikes again!!
“post-legal”? We are still getting the Birther crap?
I (and I’m sure many others) have made this point before: in the Reality-Denying Bizzaroworld of Rightwingnuttia, what those nutjobs dogmatically believe and want is, by definition, representative of “the American People” (they say this all the time!).
Ergo, ipso facto, presto chango, abracadabra, any president (or anyone else) elected against the wishes of a majority of wingnuts is by definition “illegitimate”.
(It also follows “logically” that those elections must also have been illegitimate, hence vote suppression measures are “justified” as thwarting essentially non-existent “voting fraud” — how else could the Kenyan muslim pretender have gotten in when they, “the [self-declared] American people”, so viscerally opposed and irrationally hate him? It’s an unquestioned given in Rightwingnuttia that Obama is illegitimate as prez from the git-go, and never mind the facts comprising Reality.)
Isn’t the senate in recess? Couldn’t Obama appoint someone to fill the opening until the end of his term?
The Senate is never in recess these days. There are procedural tricks. SCOTUS rejected Obama’s attempt to overcome the procedural tricks. No recess appointment.
The old Supreme Court decided Obama could not make recess appointments. Whether Stevens would change his mind on that now we don’t know. Obama should, as quickly as possible, make the recess appointment and let the Supreme Court have it out on the question again.
(um, not Stevens, of course….)
Agree that’s what he should do . . . eventually. But first he needs to let the political Kabuki play out. Let the Republicans be seen to be the obstructionists that they are. Even the lo-info voters will get it.
Plus, I’m not sure how long McConnell can get away with his plan. He’s got some very vulnerable senators up for re-election this fall, and they might peel away from him if the issue gets hot enough.
They won’t peel away from him.
It cannot get hotter than the conservative passion for Obama not to replace Scalia.
Agreed. Incumbent GOP Senators up for re-election this year who left any doubt that they would vote to block a SCOTUS nominee would lose in their Party primaries. I’m sure they’ll all have opponents who will hold them to that position.
It’s a bad general election position, but these Republican Senators all helped manufacture this bed; now they’ll have to lay on it.
Any Republican Senators that could fold? Kelly Ayotte (NH), Shelley Capito (WV), Lamar Alexander (TN), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Thad Chochran (MS), Rob Portman (OH), Orrin Hatch (UT), Lindsey Graham (SC), John Cornyn (TX), Mike Rounds (SD), Dean Heller (NV), Richard Burr (NC), Ron Johnson (WI), Bob Corker (TN), Thom Tillis (NC), John Hoeven (ND), Pat Roberts (KS), John McCain (AZ)? Only need a handful (four, I think + Biden) defections for nominee to be approved.
you need fourteen senators, not four.
So, they’ll filibuster, of course. Dead end then.
The one who has to yield is McConnell. If McConnell allows a vote, it will happen, and anybody Obama nominates will pass, because he’ll nominate only the best-respected centrist. If McConnell says no, you won’t get 14 insurgents opposing him, period.
We need to pressure Mark Kirk on this — often. Whichever way he answers will lose him votes.
Definitely. There are 3-4 senators who are R but in D or purple states, who would be vulnerable.
A request to my Booman Farms neighbors. Most of you don’t know me well, and I don’t know any of you.
Please swallow your words of contempt and play this one out smart. We can win this one easily and quickly if we don’t shove our feet down their throats, or anything else.
Let’s just lay back and let the sun shine on us, smartly.
Thanks,
J
Correct. No nasty comments. Stuff gets read by folks, and quotes are taken if made.
Too late. Have you been to Dailykos? In fairness, Scalia wasn’t just a person; he was one of nine Supreme Court justices — people who have a profound impact on our nation and the entire world. But for Scalia there would have been no President Bush, no Iraq War, probably no ISIS. At least a million people would still be alive.
On the other hand, I doubt there would have been a President Obama but for a President dimwit to precede him. Since I consider Obama one of the great men of our time, his election and reelection is a sort of silver lining. Much as I think Gore would have been alright, he’s no Obama.
DK is filled with puerile morons, and I no longer read it without feelings of great annoyance. I am not surprised. I’d have expected Kos to give all front-pagers a large bottle of scotch, and take pix of the party.
No sacred cows at the Onion:
http://www.theonion.com/graphic/justice-scalia-dead-following-30-year-battle-socia-52356?utm_source=
Twitter&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Pic:1:Default
Or here;
http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2016/02/dead-judge.html
No question the Republicans try to block any nomination even though their behavior is nothing less than Constitutional nullification. Since they’re shameless, they’ll just pound their chests about defending the Constitution in some odd logical inversion.
I do wonder, however, if such behavior might have the potential to put the House in play. If the Democrats can frame this as something outrageous in a way that turns out their voters and reaches Independents, maybe there’s a chance. Certainly plays into the narrative of Republicans as obstructionists who don’t give a fig about governing. Didn’t help them post-Katrina and maybe it won’t help them now.
The House is not in play, period, and nothing will put it into play. This is not likely to have any effect on the House. Senate, possibly it might influence.
You’re probably right but gerrymandering has the potential to spring back with all sorts of unintended consequences if enough votes are put in play.
Not so fast. Just because Hillary Clinton’s campaign has given up on winning the House doesn’t mean that you should:
https:/www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/45id8v/sanders_can_win_the_house_in_2016_538co
ms_swing
https:/www.reddit.com/r/GrassrootsSelect/comments/3mvh1h/how_we_can_retake_the_us_house_in_2016_spo
iler_it
Winning the House is very doable in 2016. The biggest factor to success would be turning out Millenials, especially black and white Millenials (whose turnout and/or support tanked going from 2008 to 2012). The early signs from Bernie Sanders’ campaign look very promising.
The House is always in play. Every two years. We’re not quite the zombie nation such an absolute assumption suggests. Democrats need to gain only 30 seats to retake the majority. It’s hardly out of the question and certainly not impossible that Democrats will retake the house this year.
46 House seats had a PVI of R+3 or fewer in 2014. Winning the House is quite doable, as long as the Democratic Party doesn’t just throw in the towel ahead of time.
DWS, need I say more?
I have trouble imagining what could be a more potentially damaging event for the GOP. Here’s why. I saw an interview with Obama a month or two ago and he was talking about how ready Michelle is to be done with the FLOTUS life. But Barack, after saying all the right things about the term limit, started talking about how he could see himself having a third term. Asked if he thought he could win a third term, his response was this sort of Jordan – like nod and mmm-hmmm.
Barack ‘s a baller. He wants to be on the court. And has been noted, he’s fresh out of fuck to give. What this moment does is bring him back on the stage in a dramatic way.
I feel like, if the GOP really goes to the wall on this, the president will break them over his knee. This is just a feeling I have. But consider also, this is a court that has gone out of it’s way to shit on him. He ain’t sitting this one out. This is like him getting the chance for a third term.
Nothing would please me more but I can’t see any avenue to do anything more than perhaps influence the next election.
It’s politics. Republicans think they had Obama neutralized: control of congress, lame duck. He just attached a chainsaw to his severed arm and found a shotgun in the shed. It’s on. Of course, he’ll do it in a sophisticated way.
Is my boomstick!
What do you mean, “damaging”? There’s no such thing.
I mean, look at the current election coverage. Look at the voters! Look at the candidates! You think any of those people are going to be shamed by egregious procedural excesses?
Look at those fucking idiots taking over the wildlife refuge in the name of “opposing government tyranny!” They literally can’t regard Obama’s presidency as being a legitimate expression of democracy. They believe that all of his actions have been illegal or something. It’s incredible.
Anyway my point is, nothing’s going to get “damaged”
Could be. Like I said, just a feeling. But consider: how constrained has Obama been by an ultra conservative Supreme court? Even if he doesn’t get another justice, the conservative block just lost veto power. Now Obama has a year left for executive action.
This is an excellent and intriguing point, blindtrust9.
It’s worthwhile to remember that Federal Circuit Courts have effectively blocked implementations of some executive orders, however.
leaving the law of one part of the land different, sometimes even opposite to, the law of another part; until SCOTUS steps in to resolve the difference.
Which is what the congressional wingnuts swear they will — with unprecedented, anti-[small-d]emocratic irresponsibility — keep from happening for a year.
link (this thread) covers this very thoroughly.
Obama appears before the Senate. He says, “If you don’t vote on a SC Justice, Hillary has told me that I would be the nominee that she would put up. So, think about that, folks.”
Really like your thinking. Would be irony of ironies if obstruction opened the door to a Justice Obama.
Can you say “Chief Justice Barack Obama”? Can you say “William Howard Obama”?
Don’t see Roberts going anywhere anytime soon, much as I’d like to.
Love it, but Obama has already said he doesn’t want to be on the SCOTUS.
Still, it would be a nice moment.
He can’t say “Hillary has just told me . . . ” It’s a backhanded way of saying “Vote for her and you’ll get me too.” Very unethical. If he did say that, and if I were Sanders, I’d say, “well, vote for ME and you’ll get him too.”
Have Hillary and Bernie announce together that if Obama doesn’t get who he wants, whichever one of them wins will choose him. Take your choice, GOP.
There’s a nonzero probability that Clinton or Sanders could win the presidency with a Democratic senate. It would be nice for them to have a free hand.
All right, I’ll take that.
I have nothing positive to say.
So…..I’ll keep quiet, as my mother taught me.
Say it anyway. Fuck Scalia, comparing me to a fucking child molester and saying that because of my skin color I should go to a ‘slower’ college. In addition to all of the other monstrous shit he said/did, like using a fucking television show to justify torture or striking down Obama’s climate legislation last week.
You fuck up my future, you should be lucky that all I do is spit on your grave.
And fuck that ‘have some respect for the dead durr’ false comity shit. Only privileged upper-middle class pricks have the luxury of truckin’ on smartly and with hope towards the future regardless of what these black-robed cargo cultists do.
Tell us how you really feel!
How about some Scalia quotes! Let us have a competition: find the most odious Scalia opinion and post it!
And that is all I am going to do, because this shit makes me want to drink.
As some Twitter wit mentioned, it’s really kind of hard to fault ancestor cultures for putting so much stock into shamans and augury when the fate of the world revolves around 9 dorks in bad robes who try to divine what 2-centuries-dead slaveowners would think about modern politics.
De mortuis nil nisi bonum. Ergo — nihil.
Here we go:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXm7FM7f1dU
Booman, I respect your sense of decorum. I wish I had your sense of decency, but I don’t so here goes:
I was watching a very inspiring BBC program about M.S. stem cell treatments at Sheffield Hospital in England. The news of Scalia’s death flashed on the bottom feed banner. I clicked on the remote to take me to CNN. Images of flags at half staff were already displayed. A CNN newsette with that horrible Jane Pauly East Coast lump of phlegm omnipresent in the throat was voicing over an image of a sort of Sesame Street cuddly muppet image of Scalia grinning from ear to ear, as the CNN bimbette was fondly remembering Scalia with heaps of gravitas, and in an almost reflexive convulsion, I found myself clicking back to the BBC with stories of hope for M.S. sufferers who are able to walk again with the aid of stem cell treatments.
Research for which was blocked in the US for years by the smirking moron Scalia helped put in the White House. Circle of life, baby…
When I heard the news, I certainly didn’t need a Kleenex.
What’s funny is you could have said the opposite, to the same effect.
…waiting for Scalia’s death ended December 12, 2000.
Implications.
Thanks so much for this link to the important details.
Appears that a lot of bad stuff is likely to remain in force. Depending on one’s particular priorities, looks like the potential of a net negative for non-conservatives.
As a liberal and a Labor supporter, I can tell you that the the mass defunding of Unions that would almost certainly have happened with the Friedrichs decision is a big bullet Fate has allowed us to dodge.
I see Srinivasan’s name popping all over now. Would the republicans really roll the dice on the next election given they had already unanimously approved him to the powerful DC circuit court in 2013?
I also think Jane Kelly would be an interesting choice, putting senator Grassley in a awkward position. She was also approved unanimously.
McConnell’s taking heavy criticism on his Facebook page for plunging headlong into his declaration of obstruction, a lot of it from people stating they’re Republicans but disgusted by such blatant politicizing of the issue. Won’t change his behavior, of course, but I do wonder whether the GOP as a whole will suffer significant electoral dysfunction from this.
Of course others there are others supporting him, but they tend to the ALL CAPS!!!!! semiliterate Obummer DummyRATS level of discourse, and thus may be considered beyond reach of all rationality in any case. That’s not, I hope anyway, a sufficiently large percentage of the voting population to control the electoral outcome.
You have a higher opinion f yje electorate than me.
I’m so grateful to President Obama for providing dignity and leadership in these moments. Mitch McConnell and the campaigns who already jumped into arguing about a successor look like adolescents. The corpse is barely cold; the only decent thing to do today is to offer sympathy to the man’s family and friends. Maybe bake them a casserole or something.
Another wonderful thing about Obama is that I can look forward to watching him take full advantage of everyone else’s overreach when the time is right.
Well said, Rachel. I thought his remarks were well measured and carried just the right tone. He sounded so much more mature and reasonable than the many Republicans (including their leaders) who were immediately posturing over a corpse which, as you said, was not yet cold.
There will be time enough to game things out and determine the best path forward. A president this seasoned in responding to total unprecedented obstruction will make the best of it.
I was at a large gathering of people when this news hit and was shocked that even quite a few intelligent, educated progressive-leaning people had no idea that:
The more noise the GOP makes en route to confirming OR not confirming Obama’s nominee, the more of a civics lesson our pathetically ignorant, seldom-voting electorate will get. That might be more important than ANYTHING else in our political lifetimes. If 80% plus of those eligible to vote learn how our government works, the GOP will never win another election at any level.
Would your “respect for the dead” rule apply to Hitler? Because Scalia’s actions in the last calendar WEEK alone have the potential to sign more death warrants than Hitler, Stalin, Mao and the Black Plague combined. And no, Mr. Godwin, you sactimonious twit, that is NOT hyperbole. That’s arithmetic. There are only four reasons why Scalia was not the greatest monster in history: Thomas, Alito, Roberts & Kennedy.
smackdown (since my ratings never “take” here, for unknown reasons).
Then Bernie will nominate the next one.
I fear this hurts Bernie’s chances immensely. The Clintonista’s will push the electability meme even harder. “If Bernie is the candidate Ted Cruz could appoint the next Justice.”
And they’d have a great point.
And if Hillary is the candidate Ted Cruz could appoint the next Justice.
Let’s get started
MICHELLE ALEXANDER for Supreme Court
I can think of no better summer than watching this articulate, beautiful, intelligent woman explain “The New Jim Crow” to the Senate.