Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is dead

[Cerin]

It does seem like it would be a better strategy for Republicans, to allow votes and reject the nominees, than to refuse to take up the nominations at all, which could more easily be seen as obstructing the constitutional process.

[Dave_LF]

Maybe, if half of them hadn't run on promises to obstruct the government.

[CosmicBob]

McConnell saying that the voters should get a say in this (his justification for not bringing up any nomination) ignores the fact that the voters elected and re-elected Obama. Most of them knowing full well that his obligation is to appoint judges and SCOTUS justices.

McConnell is being typically disingenuous. And Cruz promising to filibuster any Obama nominee is being typically Cruz.

[Lalaith]

Any chance that Obama himself could be nominated if they drag this out long enough? (I saw that possibility being floated around out there but am skeptical of its viability.)

[Frelga]

McConnell saying that the voters should get a say in this (his justification for not bringing up any nomination) ignores the fact that the voters elected and re-elected Obama. Most of them knowing full well that his obligation is to appoint judges and SCOTUS justices.

McConnell is being typically disingenuous. And Cruz promising to filibuster any Obama nominee is being typically Cruz.

Isn't the Supreme Court NOT being elected kinda the point?

[Dave_LF]

Any chance that Obama himself could be nominated if they drag this out long enough? (I saw that possibility being floated around out there but am skeptical of its viability.)

He doesn't want it (or that's what he says, anyway). But it would make great theater.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

It does seem like it would be a better strategy for Republicans, to allow votes and reject the nominees, than to refuse to take up the nominations at all, which could more easily be seen as obstructing the constitutional process.

Except that if they allow hearings and a vote on a specific nominee, particularly one who is appealing and qualified, and then vote that person down, there is a face to their obstructionism, which could make it even worse. Either way, I think they are backed into a corner.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Here's a fun scenario to consider, which is possible (not that I think there is a remote possibility of it happening). Lets say the GOP stays firm on refusing to consider any nominee, no matter how qualified, no matter how moderate, that Obama nominates. And lets say that in the presidential election they still win (with President-elect Rubio and Vice President-elect Kasich taking their respective home states which have been the two biggest swing states in recent elections) but the Democrats gaining a net four seats in the Senate (a distinct possibility, made greater by the vulnerable GOP Senators supporting the obstructionism). The new Senate gets seated on January 3, 2017. However, President Obama and Vice President Biden are still in office until January 20, 2017. During those 17 days, Obama could appoint however he wanted to, and any tie in the Senate would be broken by Biden! A couple of years ago the Senate eliminated the filibuster for all judicial appointments other than Supreme Court appointments. They could, however, ram through a new rule that extends that to include SCOTUS appointments, with Biden providing the tie-breaking vote. And then Obama could appoint himself, and the Senate could confirm him, with Biden providing the tie-breaking vote.

It could happen. It won't, but it could.

[CosmicBob]

Here's a fun scenario to consider, which is possible (not that I think there is a remote possibility of it happening). Lets say the GOP stays firm on refusing to consider any nominee, no matter how qualified, no matter how moderate, that Obama nominates. And lets say that in the presidential election they still win (with President-elect Rubio and Vice President-elect Kasich taking their respective home states which have been the two biggest swing states in recent elections) but the Democrats gaining a net four seats in the Senate (a distinct possibility, made greater by the vulnerable GOP Senators supporting the obstructionism). The new Senate gets seated on January 3, 2017. However, President Obama and Vice President Biden are still in office until January 20, 2017. During those 17 days, Obama could appoint however he wanted to, and any tie in the Senate would be broken by Biden! A couple of years ago the Senate eliminated the filibuster for all judicial appointments other than Supreme Court appointments. They could, however, ram through a new rule that extends that to include SCOTUS appointments, with Biden providing the tie-breaking vote. And then Obama could appoint himself, and the Senate could confirm him, with Biden providing the tie-breaking vote.

It could happen. It won't, but it could.

Heads would explode! It would be funny to watch, that's for sure.

[Cerin]

Appointing oneself to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court would be unseemly beyond words, and ethically questionable, imo. (Sorry to be a wet blanket, Voronwë.)

[Primula Baggins]

Of course, Obama could use this same strategy and appoint a young, well-qualified progressive jurist rather than himself.

Heads would still explode, but the ethical issue would go away.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Appointing oneself to a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court would be unseemly beyond words, and ethically questionable, imo. (Sorry to be a wet blanket, Voronwë.)

Cerin, I was not suggesting this as a real option, as I can't imagine you do not realize. Just a little playful fun.

[tinwë]

Ooh! I have one! What if every one in the House gets voted out and replaced with aliens from the planet Xornon? And the Xornon house declares the constitution unconstitutional and replaces it with the Xornon Terms of Service, which they force the senate to approve since they totally can, due to the feared Xornon Pan-molecular Ray Balster? Then they fire all of the Supreme Court Justices (which they totally can too, see Ray Blaster) and then they bring Scalia back to life and clone him and set up the court with nine Antonin Scalias, only the cloning process goes wrong and the clones all metamorphosize into giant pandas and the U.S. Supreme Court is suddenly controlled by a zombie Scalia and an embarrassment of pandas?



It won’t happen, but it’s as likely as anything else at this point.

And Zombie Scalia and an Embarrassment of Pandas would be an awesome band name.

[Primula Baggins]

<silently burns next novel>

[TheTennisBallKid]

I'm in favor of just replacing the entire House and the Senate with giant pandas anyway. It'd be like all the monkeys with all the typewriters writing the complete works Shakespeare. With lots of bamboo.

[yovargas]

I wouldn't say as likely as anything else at this point. But both are very, very unlikely, yes.

( ttbk)

[Lalaith]

I like ttbk's idea!

And an Embarrassment of Pandas would be a great band name! I had kind of settled on Acoustic Shadows, though.

[Maria]

You wouldn't want a band's performance to be dominated by acoustic shadows!

[yovargas]

I prefer an Embarrassment of Acoustic Shadows.

[tinwë]

Prim, sorry.

ttbk, hey! I like pandas too! Although Acoustic Shadows sound pretty cool too.

And for the record, "Embarrassment" is in fact the proper term of venery for a group of pandas.

http://www.pets.ie/pet_talk/an-embarras ... f-animals/

And also for the record, I was not trying to be disrespectful or dismissive of a serious situation, just trying to inject a little levity.