Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NRaleighLiberal

(60,015 posts)
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 07:55 PM Jan 2017

slate - "Seat Merrick! Trumps nominee shouldnt get a hearing until Merrick Garland is seated

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/dear_congress_don_t_seat_donald_trump_s_nominee_until_merrick_garland_is.html


by Dawn Johnsen

As President Donald Trump’s nominee for the vacant Supreme Court seat receives public scrutiny in the coming days, it’s incumbent for us all to remember one thing: This seat was not Trump’s to fill.

In fact, the U.S. Senate should refuse to confirm anyone President Trump nominates to the Supreme Court—until Trump renominates and the Senate confirms Judge Merrick Garland. On Monday, Sen. Jeff Merkley of Oregon said he would be leading a Senate filibuster of any Trump nominee until Garland is seated. This is the only correct approach.

To recap: The Senate failed to fulfill its constitutional responsibility with its unprecedented refusal even to consider President Obama’s nomination of Garland. Obama made the nomination with about a year left in his presidency, but from day one the Republican Senate leadership insisted that it would permanently block the nomination.

No one ever questioned Garland’s qualifications—an impossibility for this brilliant, dedicated public servant. The obstruction constituted an insulting challenge to Obama’s legitimacy, accompanied by calls for the people to decide via the election of the next president.

snip - much more to read.

I completely agree - was thinking about this today while listening to The World on NPR
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
slate - "Seat Merrick! Trumps nominee shouldnt get a hearing until Merrick Garland is seated (Original Post) NRaleighLiberal Jan 2017 OP
Come on, this is a little dumb PJMcK Jan 2017 #1
To turn the tables ... IggleDuer Jan 2017 #2

PJMcK

(22,037 posts)
1. Come on, this is a little dumb
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 08:01 PM
Jan 2017

Judge Garland's nomination expired. He cannot be seated on the Supreme Court without a new nomination.

His nomination expired on January 3, 2017, with the end of the 114th Congress. Due to the election of President Donald Trump, his nomination has not been reintroduced to the Senate.


More explanation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merrick_Garland

IggleDuer

(964 posts)
2. To turn the tables ...
Tue Jan 31, 2017, 08:08 PM
Jan 2017

The RW line has been that Garland could not be considered since the 2016 presidential campaign was already underway. If Merkley or some other Democrat would declare him/herself a candidate for 2020 now, using the RW standard, any Trump nominee should not be considered by the Senate. Since Kim Jon Don is likely to be impeached, he should not have the right to nominate anyone for SCOTUS. That is the standard the Repubs have established.

In other news, Judge Scalia is still dead.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»slate - "Seat Merrick! Tr...