scalia is dead

[wesw]

a man whom I have despised for much of my adult life has passed and I am sorry to see him go.

age brings wisdom and I came to appreciate him.

senate, do not consent to any more of Obama s wishes. we have time. let it pass....

[Lord Jim]

Wow...

Even though he was 79, he seemed to be in very robust good health...very unexpected...

I didn't always agree with him, but he had a brilliant mind...

I can't imagine Obama nominating someone in the height of an election year that could possibly be confirmed to replace him...

Yet another factor has been tossed into the election...

[Gob]

Why the hell would the death of a judge affect the election? Your system is nuts.

[ex-khobar Andy]

I agree with LJ (never thought I would say that) and yes, it's a massive rock thrown into the election pond.

[Lord Jim]

I can't see a nomination here that Obama could make that goes well...

If he were to try to pick a moderate conservative consensus candidate that could pass the Senate with a GOP majority, (Orrin Hatch comes to mind)...

His own party (which is moving substantially to the left in its nomination fight) would rise up in revolt...

On the other hand, if he nominated someone acceptable to them, they would have no chance of being confirmed in a Senate with a 54-46 GOP majority...

At this point, we're going to need the results of the next election to sort this out...

This seat will not be filled till next year...

[Lord Jim]

Mr. Justice Scalia and The Notorious RBG were actually very good friends:

On Saturday, one of the most bombastic people to serve on the highest court in the land, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, was found dead. Although Scalia, 79, was notoriously conservative — and quite vociferously expressed those views in his decisions and in real life — he was actually close friends with one of the most progressive current Supreme Court justices, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. As much as Ginsburg, 82, has become a beloved icon for millennials with her own series of RBG memes, Scalia was seen as the grumpy, out-of-touch grandfather figure. The Ginsburg-Scalia pair was a friendship that outsiders found surprising, considering their nearly-always polar views on a number of issues.

For example, one of their most recent disagreements on the bench was on the topic of same-sex marriage. While Ginsburg voted in favor in last year's landmark Supreme Court decision to strike down gay marriage bans throughout the country and has personally officiated multiple same-sex marriages, Scalia wrote a scathing dissent, which has taken on a certain infamy in its seething anger.

Despite these different views, Scalia and Ginsburg had a deep mutual respect for each other. Unsurprisingly, Ginsburg was often questioned about how she could maintain this highly reverential friendship, and her simple response explains the camaraderie perfectly. At a George Washington University event in 2015 when both shared the stage, she said:

"I disagreed with most of what he said, but I loved the way he said it."

Ginsburg's ability to see through their conflicting opinions to Scalia's intellect and enjoy the person he was outside the hallowed halls of the U.S. Supreme Court is to her credit. Scalia actually said something quite similar about Ginsburg at the same event. Calling them the "odd couple," Scalia said of Ginsburg, "What's not to like — except her views on the law."

The Ginsburg-Scalia pair had such a mystique that it recently inspired its own opera. Derrick Wang's Scalia/Ginsburg premiered last year, a production that had its own meta-quality to it because the two Supreme Court justices actually did enjoy attending the opera together. In fact, Scalia and Ginsburg even vacationed together when the Supreme Court was in recess and regularly celebrated New Year's Eve together, according to a Los Angeles Times article on their "BFF" status.

http://www.bustle.com/articles/141707-t ... ias-legacy

[ex-khobar Andy]

And it would not surprise me if Trump turns out to be the voice of reason tonight, saying that the President has the right and in fact the obligation to appoint a successor. Of course I could be wrong. According to my wife it has happened before but I don't remember.

[Lord Jim]

...Trump turns out to be the voice of reason tonight

Well, that would certainly be a first...

[Lord Jim]

it's a massive rock thrown into the election pond.

That's absolutely correct...

We have an election cycle which is already "atypical" for a whole lot of reasons, and now we have this thrown into the mix...

No way it will be resolved until after the next election...

[Lord Jim]

Why the hell would the death of a judge affect the election? Your system is nuts.

He is not just a "judge"...

He was a leading Supreme Court Justice...

Do try to keep up...

[Gob]

So he was a big court judge, so what? Nuts.

[RayThom]

Well, he did make it to 79. He liked to eat large meals so I'm not surprised. I bet he took the cab ride right after a late dinner. The Notorious RBG isn't in the best of health either. Regardless, there won't be a replacement until after January 20th.

[Bicycle Bill]

a man whom I have despised for much of my adult life has passed and I am sorry to see him go.

age brings wisdom and I came to appreciate him.

senate, do not consent to any more of Obama s wishes. we have time. let it pass....

So what you're saying, wes, is that the seat should remain open for almost a full year until the next President-elect takes office.  Then, and only then, should we let him or her make a selection and begin the process of confirmation — which for all intents and purpose is the Congressional version of the Spanish Inquisition — meaning that it could be almost a year and a half (or more) before the vacancy is finally filled.

Wow.  There's so much more that I could say, but "wow" pretty much seems to cover it.

-"BB"-

[Lord Jim]

the seat should remain open for almost a full year until the next President-elect takes office.

It shouldn't happen like this, but in the current political environment, I don't see it happening any other way...

the election will have to be resolved first...

[wesw]

I said nothing of the kind , BB.

the president should nominate whomever he wishes to nominate, in his own time.

the senate should reject his nominee, quickly, and he can then do as he pleases again.

lather rinse and repeat , keeping Obama doing busywork until the sun sets on his sorry ass presidency

[Lord Jim]

It's kind of funny...(funny strange, not funny ha ha)

In every election cycle, both the Dems and the GOP talk about the importance of Supreme Court appointments in an abstract way...

This time it's going to have a literal impact....

[Lord Jim]

I see that Slick Hillie's already saying:

"Whoever Obama nominates, the Republicans will oppose them..."

Well of course they will...

And the Democrats will oppose any Republican choice...

This is why we have elections....

[Lord Jim]

this is the better thread...

[Fafhrd]

My first reaction to this news was "Now who is Mr. Justice Thomas going to look to, to tell him how to vote?"

What this news does is leave the Supreme Court virtually powerless for the next year and a half. No way the Senate will ratify any nominee made by President Obama, and it will take the next Senate at least six months to vet and ratify anyone the next President nominates. In the meantime, with the Court will often be tied at 4-4, meaning that the case is returned to the court from which it was appealed unchanged, so none of the important cases coming before the Court will be decided this term.

[liberty]

Why the hell would the death of a judge affect the election? Your system is nuts.

Well Gob as you know the US has a different system than the UK. We have a document that guaranties our rights, but those rights are only as safe as the quality of the judge whose job it is protect the Constitution from liars. It is as the man himself said the constitution says what it says not what I want it to say. It is not up to a judge to make it say what you want it to say; that is the job and right of the people.