Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed away at 87.....

[KSRBEvans]

FWIW, SCOTUS blog article on Supreme Court nominations during Presidential election years:

https://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/s...lection-years/

In every situation but 1 where the President and control of the Senate was the same political party, there has been a vote. That 1 situation was interesting because it was a nomination of an already-sitting Justice (Abe Fortas) to fill Chief Justice Warren's seat in 1968. There was a bi-partisan filibuster and eventually the nomination was withdrawn. The person who was going to succeed Fortas as an Associate Justice withdrew his name from consideration because there was no seat for him to fill. Fortas ended up resigning from the Court the next year because of another ethics scandal.

[CitizenBBN]

Whenever the White House and Senate are controlled by the same party there will be an appointment. That's in the realm of "duh" as politics goes.

If this were President Hillary Clinton and Schumer and the GOP was looking promising to win the White House would they hold off a SCOTUS pick till after the election? Does anyone believe such a thing?

My only complaint is they all feel the need to hide their politics behind some trumped up (pardon the pun) moral or ethical explanation, like in 2016 "letting the voters decide", or when Biden did the same thing with Bush I, or both McConnell and Schumer now.
, and
Just say the truth, that as a Republican or Democrat you want conservative or liberal justices, respectively, and you were elected to do just that, and that's what you're doing. Just say "no I'm not going to put Garland on the bench when there's a chance I can wait, which is completely within my power to do, and hopefully get a justice that is more in line with my views of what a justice should believe."

What's wrong with that? And Schumer, instead of vilifying every conservative with personal attacks and smears and claiming some kind of morality in hoping that Biden wins and they can get a more liberal justice, just say "we obviously will do everything we can politically do dissuade the GOP from moving forward b/c we hope we can wait till the next session and get a more liberal justice."

There is no moral high ground here, no ethical behavior.

The only thing that borders on anything but pure politics is the elimination of the filibuster by Harry Reid for all but SCOTUS picks, and only then b/c he didn't have one to make. They had planned on having the Senate possibly and the White House for sure for long enough to fill up the courts.

Once he did that the gloves have been coming off in the Senate in a way not seen since the 1850s. No one has been beaten with a cane just yet, but we don't feel too far from it.

And that's as much on Reid as anyone. Yes the GOP "obstructed", and since Trump was elected the day after the Democrats called it "resisting". It's what the minority does. Reid eliminated that ability for judicial appointments, and it has now bitten them in the ass hard.

And, in truth, had I believed for a second the Democrats wouldn't do it again, I'd have preferred McConnell reinstate the filibuster rules and return that balance, but we all know that it would have led to the GOP crippling themselves the last 4 years and then when the Democrats swung back into power they would eliminate the rule again and the GOP would be suckers.

So here we are, with the filibuster for judicial appointments totally gone, and the Dems with no one to thank but themselves, not liking how it has played out.

And in response I imagine instead of learning their lesson they will, if they get power, eliminate it for everything, and go wild. That will lead to a big off year election backlash IMO, but the divide will have widened even more, perhaps more than ever before in a single period, and compromise will be even more near death than it was before.

With talk of ending the filibuster, ending the electoral college, packing SCOTUS, we see a pattern of extremism that is unwinding our national fabric.

I have yet to get how Trump gets accused of doing that when he has done far less, and been far less ready to take such extreme steps. It's the left that is calling for undoing the work of the Framers as if we are smarter than those brilliant minds.

[KSRBEvans]

Guarantee the Democrats are ruing the day their guy Harry Reid got rid of the judicial filibuster.

[CitizenBBN]

McConnell warned him, in his very Senatorial understated way.

I think it will prove to be the beginning of the end of the Senate in its role as a tempering, compromising body that has a stabilizing effect.

[dan_bgblue]

McConnell warned him, in his very Senatorial understated way.

I think it will prove to be the beginning of the end of the Senate in its role as a tempering, compromising body that has a stabilizing effect.

I have always relied on that level headed, fairly non partisan part of the government to moderate the craziness that has emanated from the House. When we do not have that moderation, we will witness government run amok.

[KeithKSR]

Some Dems in the Senate oppose eliminating the filibuster, but will they vote that way or will they cave the way they normally do? I’m thinking they will cave.

[Doc]

Some Dems in the Senate oppose eliminating the filibuster, but will they vote that way or will they cave the way they normally do? I’m thinking they will cave.

Yes, except Joe Mansion. Only democrat with balls, excluding the Speaker of the House

[KeithKSR]

Yes, except Joe Mansion. Only democrat with balls, excluding the Speaker of the House

Manchin talks a good game but tends to vote with Schumer. He will vote with the Dems on this nomination, despite what he says in the interviews.

[KeithKSR]

I have always relied on that level headed, fairly non partisan part of the government to moderate the craziness that has emanated from the House. When we do not have that moderation, we will witness government run amok.

That’s the way the system was designed. The House gets kind of whacky and the Senate was intended to be a much more deliberative body.

[dan_bgblue]

Yes, except Joe Mansion. Only democrat with balls, excluding the Speaker of the House

[dan_bgblue]

What the Democrats really Fear

[KeithKSR]

What the Democrats really Fear

That’s a good read, and the points they make are very valid.

[dan_bgblue]

RIP and thanks for her service. She could have retired halfway into the Obama 2nd term and been replaced by President Obama. But she played out the string. I get it. It's hard to retire.

I fully believe that her intent was to make sure Hillary had the right to fill that vacancy. Obama said that elections have consequences, but the democrats were so confident of the election results that they never dreamed they could lose the right to fill her seat.

[KeithKSR]

I fully believe that her intent was to make sure Hillary had the right to fill that vacancy. Obama said that elections have consequences, but the democrats were so confident of the election results that they never dreamed they could lose the right to fill her seat.

They only think elections they win have consequences.