22 Sep 2020 11:32 am
I believe it was a bluff, just as Democrats are bluffing now and for exactly the same reason. Any currently sitting Senators know that any major change they decide to do will then be undone immediately afterward and would cause retaliation from the other party the next time the Senate changes hands.Misty » 21 Sep 2020, 9:12 pm » wrote: ↑ That door was opened in 2016 when many Republicans said that if Hillary won the election, they would keep the 9th seat open throughout her term.
So what do you think the justification for that was?
Why do Republicans believe that they own the courts?
But you're wrong that this was caused by any hypothetical scenario that Republicans proposed. This was caused years ago by Democrat Senate leader Harry Reid, who changed the requirement for seating judges to a simple majority from a 60 vote for approval minimum in the past, so the Democrats could force through some of Obama's choices that had failed to be approved by coming up short in the vote. By doing so, he opened the door for the Republicans to retaliate by allowing the same new rules for SC justice approval.
All told, I think the current system is fair. Congress has become far too partisan and now use their own subjective criteria for rejecting a judge or justice, and this makes the process much simpler. A sitting President should have the ability to appoint the judges he wants, especially when he has provided the public with a list of qualified candidates he will pick from during his campaign as Trump has done. If he doesn't have a Senate majority, he would likely need to pick a more moderate one to obtain the approval of the Senate. If he does, he can pick one as extreme as he likes.
So why hasn't Biden provided us with the same list of candidates as Trump has done?
1 Nomination
Annoyed Liberall Sep 22, 2020
Go to original post on Sep 22, 2020 6:58am