Hirono: Dems could keep SCOTUS seat vacant for two years

[workinclasszero]

BY EMILY BIRNBAUM - 09/18/18 09:39 AM EDT

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) said the Democrats could keep retired Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy's seat vacant for two years if need be should the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to replace him fail and should Democrats take the Senate in November.

Hirono said if a replacement for Kavanaugh needed to be found, President Trump should nominate a less conservative ideologue, or else be ready for Senate Democrats to keep the court seat vacant until after the 2020 presidential election if they win the chamber in November, according to an interview with Politico Magazine.

“I think we’ve had those kinds of vacancies before, and we certainly had over a one-year vacancy with Merrick Garland,” Hirono told Politico. “So the world does not come to an end because we don’t fill all of the nominees.”

Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court was roiled when California professor Christine Blasey Ford on Sunday publicly accused him of sexually assaulting her when the two were students at neighboring D.C.-area high schools in the 1980s. Kavanaugh has strongly denied the allegations.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/407169-hirono-dems-could-keep-scotus-seat-vacant-for-two-years

[wryter2000]

1. Wow, really?

Even if we win the Senate, we wouldn't take control of it until January. Could they put off another nominee that long? I can't see any Republicans signing on for that.

[workinclasszero]

2. If the GOP is decimated in the midterms

maybe some of the survivors will buck Fox news troll BLOTUS?

[wryter2000]

4. I hope you're right

But right now, there are two Republicans who've made themselves lame ducks by deciding not to run again. Flake is one. Is Corker the other one? They're still acting like Republicans.

I keep hoping Flake will do the right thing and not vote Kavanaugh out of committee. That way, we wouldn't have to depend on Murkowski and Collins. We'll see.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

8. call!

Contact info:
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10112543

[unblock]

3. exactly. there's much to fear about the lame duck session even if we only win the house.

[djg21]

6. The first thing that needs reconsideration when Dems regain control

Is the nuclear option. Reid opened a can of worms when he first exercised the option, and we now can see how much of a mistake that was now that the tables have turned and the Republicans are in control of the Senate.

Maybe the filibuster isn’t the right option, but there needs to be some way to ensure that there is more of a bipartisan consensus with respect to SCOTUS and other judicial nominees.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mcconnell-went-nuclear-confirm-gorsuch-democrats-changed-senate-filibuster-rules-n887271

[Cosmocat]

7. Two things

First, McConnell was completely abusing the process to stem BHO's ability to fill judicial seats - he had a boatload of openings and he had them held up to the point where he could not fill them. Had Reid not done what he did, those seats that BHO was then able to fill would have remained empty and the court packing they are doing now would have included those.

Second, McConnell would absolutely, no ifs, ands, or buts, have bypassed it this go round even if Reid had not set the precedent.

[djg21]

28. Response

Second point is a counter-factual. And had BHO been more aggressive he would have gotten political points and motivated his and Hillary’s base irrespective of whether he was successful.

First point — there had to have been a better way than resort to the nuclear option. An option that at the same time would have rendered the nuclear option irrelevant.

I subscribe to the maxim that what’s sauce for the goose . . . . Control of a legislative body is almost always fleeting, and a legislative majority must be able to live with rules it advances when it eventually becomes a minority. That is just a political reality.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. There needs to be some kind of way

to force the Senate to do its Constitutional duty to do what it's supposed to do in terms of Advise & Consent. I never imagined that its Advise & Consent duties under the Constitution were optional or that the process could be circumvented the way McConnell decided to handle it.

[Spider Jerusalem]

16. "The American people have spoken, and a fair number of our colleagues are going home"

"it would be unfair to the American people, who have just voted for a change in representation, for this chamber to hear a nominee until the new Congress is seated in January" (which is McConnell's BS with Garland, only with actual substance)

[msongs]

5. way to go Mazie. nice talk now actually do it! nt

[onetexan]

22. the more i hear from this lady the more i like her

[Proud Liberal Dem]

9. Good News

but I'd probably have held off on telegraphing that until after the midterms and lame duck session was over- and, of course, Kavanaugh had been officially rejected or withdrawn. Such talk right now might re-energize the right to keep the Senate Republican.

[Wounded Bear]

24. Why?

It's pretty much what Repubs will be running on this November. It's about all they have.

[Hekate]

10. I like Mazie more all the time. Mahalo nui loa, Senator. nt

[calimary]

13. Indeed. If that's how the game is played, then WE need to play it that way too.

TIRED of being nice.

SICK AND TIRED.

[BigmanPigman]

19. Yep, I threw out the "nice guy" mantra over 1 1/2 years ago.

An eye for an eye with this group of greedy hypocrites who represent the MINORITY of the country and have for over 20 years. We keep winning the popular vote yet who is in charge of all three BRANCHES? How did they get there...by cheating and lying. The gloves are off!

[bucolic_frolic]

12. We're a long way from that alternative but I hope we get there

Defeat the current liar first. Then may have to defeat another before the end of the year. Very tall order. If we make it as a nation to 2019, the vacancy would be easily defended by noting Merrick Garland. That poor man was such a solid candidate and such a pawn in the ideological game the Republicans played. He will not be forgotten.

[gopiscrap]

14. Do it!!!!

[Perseus]

15. Why would Democrats do that?

If the Democrats win the house and the Senate, they should appoint a judge that is not form the far right. Maybe there is something here I need explaining? Why would the do that and risk republicans taken again on the Senate then nominating another Kananaugh?

[Cuthbert Allgood]

17. The President appoints and the Senate confirms.

Do you think Trump will appoint a centrist?

[7962]

20. Trump will do whatever makes him look good. Hes not a conservative or a christian.

So he doesnt care about what they think. I'm thinking this based on him not running for re-election in 20.
He's only in it for himself, so I could see him nominate someone more centrist that would be approved, then he can squawk about being able to pick 2 judges

[Wounded Bear]

25. Because Congress does not appoint judges...

the President appoints, then Congress applies their advice and consent.

[kairos12]

18. Exactly. Dems get the Senate, no SCOTUS nominations from the rethugs.

[B Stieg]

21. DO IT.

It's only fair...

[lame54]

23. I say yes...

Listen to the turtle scream

[qazplm135]

26. she's right

but I might have held my tongue on that one until after the new year.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

27. Yeah, why the fuck not?!?!

[roamer65]

29. Ultimatum to Dump if we take the Senate...Merrick Garland.

Merrick Garland or the seat sits empty till he’s out of office in January 2021.

Make that fucker nominate Obama’s candidate.

If any one else vacates a seat. Hold it empty as well unless we get a left leaning candidate.