![]() |
Justice Kennedy Retiring - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Justice Kennedy Retiring (/Thread-Justice-Kennedy-Retiring) |
RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Belsnickel - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 05:41 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Is there anyone that is opposed to term limits for Supreme Court Justices (or senators or representatives)? Yes for SCOTUS. Not sure for Congress. SCOTUS is supposed to be non-political. While there is no chance it is ever completely non-political, establishing term limits on the court would mean that it would become more beholden to political whims and it would be used even more as a political football. It would lose a degree of independence as a third, co-equal branch of government. For Congress, I am more concerned about tightening down the rules on them. Campaign finance (which would really require a constitutional amendment at this point thanks to Citizens United), an end to gifts from lobbyists, and a law against Representatives, Senators, or their staff from entering lobbying for a period of time after leaving office (if not indefinitely) would solve a lot of the problems existent in Congress more effectively than any term limits would. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Belsnickel - 06-27-2018 I really dislike the calls for Democrats to obstruct until the election based on the precedent set during 2016. I have been thinking, though, that I think it would be prudent to make the argument that any confirmation should wait until the report from Mueller. I don't think anything is going to come from it, but it would be good to wait. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 03:11 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Just saw SCOTUS Blog tweet that effective 31 July, Kennedy is retiring. NO filibuster is possible with a SCOTUS nominee. As long as Trump nominates a judge that can get all 51 GOP votes then that judge is in. The one positive for the Dems in this regard is McCain. He may not be up to voting and he will certainly demand a more moderate, though certainly more conservative than the Dems would like, candidate. (06-27-2018, 04:22 PM)GMDino Wrote: Will we have to wait until after the November elections to have hearings on a potential replacement? No, because the GOP is in power in both houses of Congress and the White House. I get your point, but no, it won't happen. (06-27-2018, 04:27 PM)Nately120 Wrote: If they hurry to appoint one it'll be a sign they don't think Trump can win a second term. No, because why would they take a chance on something as important as this? They have the numbers now, they'll have them until well after the November elections. There's zero reason for them to take it slow, beyond ensuring the 51 votes in the Senate they need. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Belsnickel - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 07:57 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: NO filibuster is possible with a SCOTUS nominee. As long as Trump nominates a judge that can get all 51 GOP votes then that judge is in. The one positive for the Dems in this regard is McCain. He may not be up to voting and he will certainly demand a more moderate, though certainly more conservative than the Dems would like, candidate. Did they blow up the filibuster for Gorsuch? I couldn't remember. I'm okay with a conservative Justice, as Kennedy is a conservative. It should just be more in line with Kennedy. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Sociopathicsteelerfan - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 08:02 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Did they blow up the filibuster for Gorsuch? I couldn't remember. I'm okay with a conservative Justice, as Kennedy is a conservative. It should just be more in line with Kennedy. Yes, they did. The Dems only real hope is McCain either being incapacitated or not approving of an overly partisan nominee. Losing that Alabama seat may have some real consequences as with it they don't need McCain. Flake is a possible stumbling block as well. I still think they'll get a nominee to the right of Kennedy. If the GOP keeps the Senate, and I think it's far more likely they gain seats than lose control, then the Dems had best hope RBG stays healthy or the SCOTUS will lean heavily conservative until Thomas dies or retires. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Millhouse - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 07:36 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I really dislike the calls for Democrats to obstruct until the election based on the precedent set during 2016. I have been thinking, though, that I think it would be prudent to make the argument that any confirmation should wait until the report from Mueller. I don't think anything is going to come from it, but it would be good to wait. Yet that precedent, which Joe Biden also advocated for on the senate floor in 1992, was about delaying the nomination until after the Presidential election. And in a way I do agree with that to a point. But I dont think a SCROTUS nomination should be delayed for Congressional races though. Waiting on Mueller might be prudent though, but that word doesnt exist in the WH. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - GMDino - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 10:35 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Yet that precedent, which Joe Biden also advocated for on the senate floor in 1992, was about delaying the nomination until after the Presidential election. And in a way I do agree with that to a point. But I dont think a SCROTUS nomination should be delayed for Congressional races though. ![]() http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/mar/17/context-biden-rule-supreme-court-nominations/ Quote:Did Biden really say he would be against the president nominating a Supreme Court justice in an election year when political control of the Senate and White House were flipped? RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Bengalzona - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 10:35 PM)Millhouse Wrote: Yet that precedent, which Joe Biden also advocated for on the senate floor in 1992, was about delaying the nomination until after the Presidential election. And in a way I do agree with that to a point. But I dont think a SCROTUS nomination should be delayed for Congressional races though. He said "SCROTUS"! (snort, snort, snort) ![]() RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Benton - 06-27-2018 I’m all for this. Elect the most conservative guy on the list. All I’ve heard my entire life (since the 80s) is that America is no longer a Utopia because republicans don’t have a super mega majority like the dems had at one point. According to the theory, all three branches of government have to belong to conservatives and then BAM everything gets solved. People start making a living wage, no more hunger or disease. So give it to them. I’m skeptical that anything benefiting the bottom 90% of people in this country will get passed, but I’d at least like them to get their shot. Let’s head back to prohibition, fewer civil rights and whatever else is on the agenda. At least it’ll get it over with and maybe we can take 5-10 years to sort it out instead of the “do nothing” quagmire we’re currently in. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Millhouse - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 10:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/joe-biden-argued-for-delaying-supreme-court-picks-in-1992.html Video included of Biden saying what he did, courtesy of NY Times. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - GMDino - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 10:55 PM)Millhouse Wrote: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us/politics/joe-biden-argued-for-delaying-supreme-court-picks-in-1992.html Yeah, uh, I posted his exact words in my post. In context too. Thanks. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Millhouse - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 10:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: Yeah, uh, I posted his exact words in my post. Thanks. No problem, just making sure we are on the same page that Biden said exactly what he said that day, which was to delay the nomination if a seat became vacant. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - bfine32 - 06-27-2018 (06-27-2018, 11:02 PM)Millhouse Wrote: No problem, just making sure we are on the same page that Biden said exactly what he said that day, which was to delay the nomination if a seat became vacant. Of course the GOP wasn't the first to suggest political tactics to serve their interests; even in cases of SCOTUS appointments. WTS, I was 100% against the GOP allowing the Obama nominee to appear before congress. I'm also against the Dems delaying based on their political gain. There's a lot of talk lately about "we should wait until after Mueller", but that's absurd. What other duties of POTUS should we delay until the investigation finds nothing? Is it just a SCOTUS nominee or are there other functions we should halt? Folks are just coming up with that Red Herring to mask their true intentions. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Bengalzona - 06-28-2018 I wish Justice Kennedy the best. He was a good judge, precisely because he wasn't swayed so much by partisanship. We would do well to have more like him. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - GMDino - 06-28-2018 (06-27-2018, 11:02 PM)Millhouse Wrote: No problem, just making sure we are on the same page that Biden said exactly what he said that day, which was to delay the nomination if a seat became vacant. He discussed that possibility but it was never agreed to or even voted on and never put into effect...until McConnell needed someone else to blame for his partisanship maneuver. Speaking of which... (06-27-2018, 11:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course the GOP wasn't the first to suggest political tactics to serve their interests; even in cases of SCOTUS appointments. WTS, I was 100% against the GOP allowing the Obama nominee to appear before congress. I'm also against the Dems delaying based on their political gain. Purely political. But that what you get with the average Trump supporter (let alone the diehard ones): They are all in and can't see their own hypocrisy. WTS, I was against the delay under Obama and a delay under Trump. The system is what it is now. As to the Mueller investigation the only caveat would be that given the political climate *IF* Trump were found guilty of something or impeached there will be much gnashing of teeth and beating of breast about whether his appointees were legitimate. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Belsnickel - 06-28-2018 (06-27-2018, 10:47 PM)Benton Wrote: I’m all for this. Elect the most conservative guy on the list. This is easy to say when you are someone that may not be as impacted as some others. With the potential shifts against the rights of women, minorities, and the LGBT community that could come with this, it is a concerning predicament. (06-27-2018, 11:25 PM)bfine32 Wrote: There's a lot of talk lately about "we should wait until after Mueller", but that's absurd. What other duties of POTUS should we delay until the investigation finds nothing? Is it just a SCOTUS nominee or are there other functions we should halt? Folks are just coming up with that Red Herring to mask their true intentions. There is no executive authority that carries as much weight and lasting impact as a SCOTUS nomination. I think that Trump will still be in office when the dust settles, I don't see us retaking the Senate. I think Trump will still be able to appoint whomever he likes. But I think it would be prudent to at least wait for the report from Mueller. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - hollodero - 06-28-2018 (06-28-2018, 08:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: WTS, I was against the delay under Obama and a delay under Trump. The system is what it is now. I get that. But it seems odd that one side does this tickery and the other side should not even consider a similar maneuver. Some would call such a restraint losing. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - michaelsean - 06-28-2018 (06-28-2018, 09:12 AM)hollodero Wrote: I get that. But it seems odd that one side does this tickery and the other side should not even consider a similar maneuver. Some would call such a restraint losing. They can't consider the maneuver. They don't have the numbers. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Belsnickel - 06-28-2018 (06-28-2018, 09:12 AM)hollodero Wrote: I get that. But it seems odd that one side does this tickery and the other side should not even consider a similar maneuver. Some would call such a restraint losing. That's the civility argument at play. When people talk about needing more civility in society, what they are really saying is "don't treat us the same way we have been treating you, that's not fair!" I have to admit, there is a part of me that wants to see us roll around in the mud. That just causes a further deterioration of democracy, though, and I want us to become more democratic, not less. What we need to be doing is focusing on policies that benefit the people. Ground game, messaging, getting out the vote. Let the pigs play in the mud and try to play out Animal Farm, we should stay on message because we have a message that is better for the people. RE: Justice Kennedy Retiring - Belsnickel - 06-28-2018 (06-28-2018, 09:17 AM)michaelsean Wrote: They can't consider the maneuver. They don't have the numbers. It was mentioned earlier about McCain possibly voting against a nominee, but because of the focus on abortion rights we may see Collins and/or Murkowski switch sides. |