Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Odoreida

(1,549 posts) Fri Mar 24, 2017, 09:12 PM Mar 2017

Filibustering Gorsuch etc

Is it in fact the policy of Democrats in the US Senate to filibuster any and all of Trump's Supreme Court nominees?

Not just Gorsuch for his particular faults?

Because if it isn't, it should be.

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Filibustering Gorsuch etc (Original Post) Odoreida Mar 2017 OP

Bigly big league. Big time. dchill Mar 2017 #1

It is a stolen seat!! Va Lefty Mar 2017 #2

Keep filibustering until Merrick Garland gets an up or down vote. Period. eom BlueCaliDem Mar 2017 #3

Garland was nominated first....he should get his hearing and vote first. rgbecker Mar 2017 #4

dchill

(38,441 posts)

1. Bigly big league. Big time.

Reply to Odoreida (Original post)

Fri Mar 24, 2017, 09:13 PM

Mar 2017

Va Lefty

(6,252 posts)

2. It is a stolen seat!!

Reply to Odoreida (Original post)

Fri Mar 24, 2017, 09:14 PM

Mar 2017

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)

3. Keep filibustering until Merrick Garland gets an up or down vote. Period. eom

Reply to Odoreida (Original post)

Fri Mar 24, 2017, 09:29 PM

Mar 2017

rgbecker

(4,820 posts)

4. Garland was nominated first....he should get his hearing and vote first.

Reply to Odoreida (Original post)

Fri Mar 24, 2017, 09:42 PM

Mar 2017

Very Simple...even Gorsuch should be able to see the justice it that.

Certainly there is a lot of precedent law in the "first come, first served" field of justice.

Reply to this discussion