Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

SCOTUS nomination: Thanks Joe

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    SCOTUS nomination: Thanks Joe

    Knew we could count on you, eventually.

    Biden argued, in part:

    …it is my view that if a Supreme Court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed.

    The Senate, too, Mr. President must consider how it would respond to a Supreme Court vacancy that would occur in the full throes of an election year. It is my view that if the President goes the way of Presidents [Millard] Fillmore and [Andrew] Johnson, and presses an election year nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.

    Biden also argued that it would be possible for the Supreme Court to operate without one of its members.
    Vice President Joe Biden spoke out forcefully against appointing a new Supreme Court justice in an election year--in 1992, when he was in the Senate.

    #2
    I love it, priceless

    Comment


      #3
      yeah, but, but, but...

      Comment


        #4
        Love it!!!

        Comment


          #5
          doesn't matter

          Comment


            #6
            POTUS has an obligation to nominate a new justice. Senate can decide on the merits for each person, and as long as they dont concent to his nominations, they are doing their constitutional duties.

            they also run the risk of making a recess appt of they want to play this game. that person will be in office for a max of two years if no confirmation is completed.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Tommyh View Post
              POTUS has an obligation to nominate a new justice. Senate can decide on the merits for each person, and as long as they dont concent to his nominations, they are doing their constitutional duties.

              they also run the risk of making a recess appt of they want to play this game. that person will be in office for a max of two years if no confirmation is completed.
              can't make a recess appt. if they don't go on recess, right?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by stickerpatch59 View Post
                can't make a recess appt. if they don't go on recess, right?
                lol, like the senate won't go on recess...

                get real, they aren't missing any of their vacation time...

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by XBowHunter View Post
                  lol, like the senate won't go on recess...

                  get real, they aren't missing any of their vacation time...
                  sadly, you are probably right about that.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    LOL........it goes both ways. Both parties are pulling out these statements, as I have read the same from the other side. Bottom line, make a nomination and if that person does not cut the mustard don't accept them. This political posturing by both sides is ole hat.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X