2016 Postmortem

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts) Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:01 PM Jun 2012

GOP Begins Judge Blockade (invoking the ''Thurmond Rule'')

With less than four and a half months until Election Day, Senate Republicans are shutting off the bipartisan spigot when it comes to confirming President Barack Obama’s nominees to the nation’s top courts and will present a unified front against his circuit court picks through November.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) made the decision to blockade nominations official Wednesday when he informed his colleagues that he would invoke the “Thurmond Rule” from now until after the elections.

Named after the late Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-S.C.) — and alternately called the “Leahy Rule” by some Republicans after Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) — the doctrine holds that within six months of a presidential election, the opposition party can, and typically does, refuse to allow votes on circuit court judges.

Republican sources said the GOP will impose its blockade on circuit court judges now but that district court nominees will likely continue to be confirmed until at least early September, when cooperation on lower court picks has traditionally ended.

--snip--

Full article here: http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_151/GOP-Begins-Judge-Blockade-215369-1.html?zkPrintable=true

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

GOP Begins Judge Blockade (invoking the ''Thurmond Rule'') (Original Post) Tx4obama Jun 2012 OP

So nothing has changed? sharp_stick Jun 2012 #1

That's what I was thinking Generic Brad Jun 2012 #11

if we failed to do our jobs for 6 months we would all be fired nt msongs Jun 2012 #2

Yawn, what a surprise. turtlerescue1 Jun 2012 #3

The only thing the House Republicans want to do is kill Obama's reelection sakabatou Jun 2012 #4

When is it going to become really obvious to more people? Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2012 #5

When the MSM starts really talking about it sakabatou Jun 2012 #7

Oddly, this rule did not apply to jeff47 Jun 2012 #6

Check their skin color Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2012 #8

actually that is just plain, flat out, false dsc Jun 2012 #9

Carter had 5 nominees confirmed between July and the election. jeff47 Jun 2012 #10

Hey baggers! Proud Liberal Dem Jun 2012 #12

sharp_stick

(14,400 posts)

1. So nothing has changed?

Reply to Tx4obama (Original post)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:04 PM

Jun 2012

Since when has that turkey necked fuckwad ever allowed any of Obama's nominees to come up for a vote?

That hypocritical piece of shit is the single most obstructionist prick I've ever seen.

Generic Brad

(14,275 posts)

11. That's what I was thinking

Reply to sharp_stick (Reply #1)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 10:46 PM

Jun 2012

I seriously can't recall a time in the last three and one half years when the Republicans did not obstruct this president's judicial nominees. The last year and a half has seen virtually no bipartisanship on any other issue either solely because of their unreasonable and persistent obstructionism.

msongs

(67,433 posts)

2. if we failed to do our jobs for 6 months we would all be fired nt

Reply to Tx4obama (Original post)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:05 PM

Jun 2012

turtlerescue1

(1,013 posts)

3. Yawn, what a surprise.

Reply to Tx4obama (Original post)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:06 PM

Jun 2012

sakabatou

(42,170 posts)

4. The only thing the House Republicans want to do is kill Obama's reelection

Reply to Tx4obama (Original post)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:20 PM

Jun 2012

They don't care about helping America, they're all about the reelection.

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,426 posts)

5. When is it going to become really obvious to more people?

Reply to sakabatou (Reply #4)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:43 PM

Jun 2012

49% is a helluva good start but still.................

sakabatou

(42,170 posts)

7. When the MSM starts really talking about it

Reply to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #5)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 05:40 PM

Jun 2012

Which they won't do.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

6. Oddly, this rule did not apply to

Reply to Tx4obama (Original post)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 04:50 PM

Jun 2012

Carter
Reagan 84
Reagan 88
HW Bush
Clinton 00
W Bush 04
W Bush 08

All of them had multiple judges confirmed with this many days to go before the ends of their terms.

But really we have to follow this rule now.

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,426 posts)

8. Check their skin color

Reply to jeff47 (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 05:55 PM

Jun 2012

Plus it's just another excuse for the Republican Senators to not do their jobs.

dsc

(52,166 posts)

9. actually that is just plain, flat out, false

Reply to jeff47 (Reply #6)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 06:05 PM

Jun 2012

It got named the Thurmond rule back in the Carter days when the Senate refused to confirm nominees. It may have moved a little earlier in the intervening years but the fact is Carter couldn't get his nominees confirmed once it look like he would be losing the election. Reagan had a GOP Senate in 84, we did slow down confirmations in both 88 and 92, clinton faced the same mess in 96 and 00 and Bush had a GOP Senate in 04.

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

10. Carter had 5 nominees confirmed between July and the election.

Reply to dsc (Reply #9)

Thu Jun 14, 2012, 09:47 PM

Jun 2012

Reagan 88, 7 w/ a Democratic Senate.
HW Bush, 6 w/ a Democratic Senate.
Clinton 00, 6 w/ a Republican Senate.

The only one with 0 since Carter is Clinton in 96.

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,426 posts)

12. Hey baggers!

Reply to Tx4obama (Original post)

Fri Jun 15, 2012, 08:48 AM

Jun 2012

Is THIS in the constitution?

Reply to this discussion