>check catalog >Not a single thread about the Senate Confirmation Hearing for Neil Gorsuch being added to the Supreme Court.
Democrats are sticking by their plan to filibuster Gorsuch, which means Republicans will amend the Senate rules to remove the 60-vote threshold and lower it to a simple 51-vote threshold. Result:
>5-4 Conservative majority on the Supreme Court >Only a simple majority needed for future Republican appointments to the court. >Old libs (((like Bader-Ginsburg))) and Steven Breyer will be retiring during Trump's term >Looking at the possibility of a 7-2 Conservative Supreme Court in the 21st century.
hey, if ur not gonna appreciate Gorsuch, we need lawmen like him here, amerifags send him here
Christopher Johnson
GO YOGURT!
Anthony Gutierrez
CRASHING THIS COURT WITH NO SURVIVORS
Kevin Robinson
>fillibuster supreme court pick because he isn't from your party
What is the logic behind this? Is there even a legal leg to stand on here? Like seriously wtf?
Thomas Campbell
And THIS is why it is so important to the Left that Trump be taken down.
Everything else is just bullshit by comparison.
Xavier Campbell
>Old libs (((like Bader-Ginsburg))) and Steven Breyer will be retiring during Trump's term >Looking at the possibility of a 7-2 Conservative Supreme Court in the 21st century.
This is the dream scenario, but I don't see it happening. Why do you think the media/establishment figures are shilling so hard against Trump?
Breyer and Bader-Ginsburg will try to hold out until the 2020 election when we get a new president. Only way they'll give up their seats is if they croak before then. (((They))) would never allow an almost completely conservative body to take over the most powerful branch of government. Sorry to burst your bubble friend.
Alexander Sanchez
Probably, but after last year, never totally dismiss anything.
Michael Ross
I feel like last year was an accident. The establishment got too cocky and thought they would win a landslide electoral victory. In the end, all they could do is stir up a controversy with the popular vote and Russian thing as damage control to buy them a couple months time.
I wouldn't put money on them making the same mistake twice. The stakes are far too high at this point.
Angel Young
Nuclear option, KEK bless it
Mason Ortiz
There was never any question. Democrats would do it without a second thought. Why play by a ruleset that your opponent would just shit all over anyways?
Joseph Reyes
His record and his confirmation proceedings indicated that as a supreme he would make fair, impartial judgments based on the law.
This is heresy to the left.
Josiah Adams
Bump for an on-topic thread
Ryder Russell
In their defense, you could say the same about Merrick Garland
Eli Roberts
Very simple logic - they want someone to do their bidding, and they planned for someone on the left to become SCOTUS after Hillary wins (according to their plan anyway).
Then Trump happened to the will of Kek, and now the Dems want to block Gorsuch who's going to be SCOTUS for the next 20-30 years.
Benjamin Richardson
Good then. The Dipshits are only fucking themselves over because when either Ginsburg or Breyer keel over due to Keks blessing. We will get more power in the Supreme Court
Brody Barnes
go nuclear.
Democrats are absolutely insane. You think they wouldn't go nuclear if the Republicans were trying to block them?
Dominic Collins
Bump for real politics
Jason Bell
Because of american education
Juan Wood
>start watching >ted cruz talking
comfy
Anthony Diaz
>Only a simple majority needed for future Republican appointments to the court.
Same goes for simple majority for Dems. Dems shot themselves in the foot by changing the rules originally, now the Republicans will as well.
Joshua Stewart
>What is the logic behind this? Is there even a legal leg to stand on here? Like seriously wtf?
Filibuster has gone from a way to delay things a bit to hope people come around to your way of thinking to a tool either party, or subset of a party, can prevent anything from getting done, In the absence of a centrist block to make compromise possible, the filibuster is doomed anyway.
When the Ds used the "nuclear option" to take confirmation of appointees EXCEPT Supremes out from under the filibuster, they made it inevitable that soon debate on confirming Supremes will be out of it as well.
They best move they could make now, I think, would be to allow a vote on Gorsuch -- he's about as inoffensive, to them, a judge as Trump is likely to pick, and he is replacing a conservative judge so no harm, no foul. They should leave well enough alone until either an extremist is nominated, or a nominee will swing the balance of the court. Then at least they can scream about how the Rs are "high-handedly changing to rules" in a situation that matters. As it is, they'll give the Rs a pass on nukling and getting Gorsuch through, while tossing any slim chance of preventing Trump Nominee 2 - Frothing Right Winger Replacing Ginsburg Boogaloo.
But whatever, due to abuse the filibuster is not going to last much longer anyway.
Caleb Thomas
Democrats no longer believe the supreme court should function as a court. >le living constitution In other words, is there a big enough mob on my side to let me get away with what amounts to legislation.
Isaac Myers
Nah
Justin Moore
I tend to agree -- while noting that the precedent was set for sitting on a nominee from a Pres nearing the end of his term before the Garland nomination. Frankly, after Bork and Thomas, I'm surprised the GOP is not just telling the D's to fuck off and ramming through whoever they want. That was disgraceful.
Brody Diaz
If you honestly think Ginsburg would ever willingly retire at this point you are retarded. She refused when Obama was in office; there is no way in hell she'll step down now. Only way she is leaving is in a bodybag, and between assassination attempts and cheeseburgers I could see Trump being in one before she'd be. Good fucking riddance.
Dylan Edwards
Except she's extremely old, even Holmes didn't hold put past his 80s. And it's a stressful occupation, even when 9/10 of your verdicts amount to mere personal prejudice
Zachary Morris
>They best move they could make now, I think, would be to allow a vote on Gorsuch -- he's about as inoffensive, to them, a judge as Trump is likely to pick, and he is replacing a conservative judge so no harm, no foul.
Right, but they are no longer acting rationally. It's almost as if the current machinations in DC are about more than just simple party politics :)