General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMcConnell: No New Supreme Court Justice Until The NRA Approves Of The Nominee
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/03/20/3761908/mcconnell-no-new-supreme-court-justice-until-the-nra-approves-of-the-nominee/McConnell: No New Supreme Court Justice Until The NRA Approves Of The Nominee
by Ian Millhiser Mar 20, 2016 11:33 am
Supreme Court justices are nominated by the president and appointed with the advice and consent of the National Rifle Association, according to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
McConnell offered this unusual view of the confirmation process during an interview with Fox News Sunday. In response to a question from host Chris Wallace, who asked if Senate Republicans would consider the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court after the election if Hillary Clinton prevails, McConnell responded that he cant imagine that a Republican majority in the United States Senate would want to confirm, in a lame duck session, a nominee opposed by the National Rifle Association and the National Federation of Independent Businesses.
The Majority Leaders statement is significant for several reasons. For one thing, it suggests that his previously stated position that this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President, is a sham. Simply put, its unlikely that the NRA or the NFIB will change their position on a nominee just because Hillary Clinton is president and not Barack Obama.
But its also worth examining exactly who McConnell would give a veto power over nominees. The NFIB, of course, was a plaintiff in NFIB v. Sebelius, the first Supreme Court case seeking to repeal the Affordable Care Act. That lawsuit called upon the justices to impose limits on federal power that even the late Justice Antonin Scalia refused to impose in previous cases (although its worth noting that Scalia abandoned his previous principled stance when given the opportunity to cast a vote against Obamacare). When the NFIB isnt fighting to take health care away from millions of Americans, it fights equally hard against raising the minimum wage.
snip//
So McConnell isnt simply delegating his duty to evaluate potential Supreme Court nominees to the NRA, hes deferring to the NRA despite the fact that the gun lobby groups case against Garland is very thin. It consists of Garlands single vote to rehear a case that one of his courts most conservative members also voted to rehear, along with a decision to allow the FBI to continue to perform audits on the background check system after lawmakers sympathetic to the NRA tried and failed to shut those audits down.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,307 posts)It's almost funny to see McConnell tying himself in knots to keep Garland from getting a fair hearing and vote.
Warpy
(110,912 posts)He doesn't give a damn about the oath he took when he got back into office. He just cares about where the money rolls in from.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)They share that ownership with big oil, big pharma and other CongressionalTimeshare investors.
SCantiGOP
(13,856 posts)Is that he doesn't hesitate to admit it. Ten years ago no one would have acknowledged this publicly.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)Actual dollars donated are a drop in the bucket compared to other special interests.
The real point is that these politicians know they won't get re-elected if the don't push this as every chance.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Ninety-two percent of voters, including 92 percent of gun owners and 86 percent of Republicans, support background checks prior to all gun sales, according to a new poll from Quinnipiac University.
The results indicate that, while the proposed shift to universal background checks has stirred intense partisan bickering inside the Beltway, it's not nearly as controversial throughout the rest of the country.
... and?
Initech
(99,915 posts)They are the enemy. They are terrorist enablers. If they get a say on SCOTUS picks, we are done for.
TeddyR
(2,493 posts)But you really think "they are the enemy"? ISIS is the enemy, Al Qaeda, not the NRA. And which terrorists exactly did the NRA "enable"? And please, no platitudes, but which terrorists were directly aided and abetted by the NRA?
Initech
(99,915 posts)Any time a kid gets a hold of a gun and uses it to shoot someone or themselves, the NRA is to blame. Any time Congress passes laws that make it easier to get guns in the hands of people who should not have them, like the Sandy Hook shooter, the NRA is to blame. That is how they enable domestic terrorism.
Chan790
(20,176 posts)It's not like "Oh, the NRA is my enemy now; I'll have to like the Clintons and forgive Al Qaeda for killing several close friends with a motherfucking airplane."
People that Chan790 considers first-class enemies on a daily basis:
Wayne LaPierre
Al From
Ayman al-Zawahiri
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi
Clarence Thomas
Mitch McConnell
Donald Trump
Ted Cruz
Paul Ryan
John Rowland
Steven Hayes
Carl and Ted from work
Ryan Seacrest
I could name more...but the point has been made; I consider a lot of different people enemies and am capable of hating them all on a daily basis...and even simultaneously. My enmity for one does nothing to reduce my enmity for the others.
Lucky Luciano
(11,242 posts)Carl and Ted can suck it too.
SCantiGOP
(13,856 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)Corrupt and stupid makes a bad combination.
Bettie
(15,998 posts)that on his own Ted would be OK, it's just Carl leading him down that path.
Point made.
LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)Chan790
(20,176 posts)As an anti-capital-punishment activist, I feel compelled to work along with dozens of other people to save his life...but it's hard because he's loathesome and evil; manipulative, cruel, cracks jokes about his crime, shows no remorse, and his favorite pastime is to threaten suicide constantly so he can spend a night in the much comfier hospital-ward and waste guards' time having to rip his entire cell apart looking for things he could use to kill himself. His second favorite pastime is to file frivolous motions to accelerate his execution, usually on grounds he knows will never be approved, typically because they're insane. ("I want to die because everything in my cell is gray and I hate gray."
The fact that he annihilated the entire family of my mother's endocrinologist doesn't make him any easier to like, let me tell you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheshire,_Connecticut,_home_invasion_murders
This is Steven Hayes. If you ever wanted proof that opposition to the death penalty is about a principle and not the inmate...he'd be it. Never in my life have I worked so hard to spare the life of someone I'll be so happy to see dead of natural causes.
LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)kill us, it is not justice, it is vengeance.
The movies that have an island for a prison has always been a good idea. 0-10 years in a prison, any thing more to the island..
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)Most other "civilized" (as we in the U.S. define them) countries don't have a death penalty these days. A life sentence with no possibility of parole, unless further evidence exonerated (as has too often happened when too late), would make more sense. Too expensive? What bullshit! We could start eliminating the the minor drug related, non-violent crimes sentences now keeping all too many locked up.
LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)trying to survive on an island. It seemed to work for the Brits and Australia a long time ago. But before we got to that point, we have to have a real justice system instead of a vengeance system. And we have a long way to go on that.
maddiemom
(5,106 posts)etc.,back in the day. "Island" sounded a bit more of a reality show and threw me off. All too many in those days were sent through vengeance and were impressive movers and shakers. Today they would mostly be victims of archaic drug laws. Where should we send them?
LiberalArkie
(15,686 posts)that would work. Maybe in 50 years, I hope.
TipTok
(2,474 posts)liberal N proud
(60,302 posts)Who died and left thimble in charge?
LIBERTY?
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)assholes is gone.
And evidently many around here are fine with a GOP white house.
deminks
(11,006 posts)Do it.
Solly Mack
(90,740 posts)Disgusting.
AgadorSparticus
(7,963 posts)What the hell does the NRA have to do with electing a SCOTUS?
surrealAmerican
(11,340 posts)Unfortunately, some of then did elect your incompetent ass, Mitch. Do your job.
longship
(40,416 posts)Disgusting McConnell!
Fuck him!
Chan790
(20,176 posts)then no GOP nominee to the federal bench should ever be confirmed without the approval of the AFL-CIO and the unanimous consent of the parents of the children murdered in Newtown by Adam Lanza.
Turbineguy
(37,212 posts)should nominate Charlie Manson. He'd be more to their liking.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Bonn1997
(1,675 posts)Republican Senate. I don't think they'll ever allow a shift in the court.
NightWatcher
(39,343 posts)downeastdaniel
(497 posts)Volaris
(10,260 posts)And that it's going to SERIOUSLY jeopardize down-ticket races.
salin
(48,954 posts)has the power to advice and consent.
So then what is the purpose of the senators? Just send the GOPers home and give all their votes to the NRA. So implies the Senate Majority leader.
gordianot
(15,226 posts)Lucky Luciano
(11,242 posts)jalan48
(13,798 posts)I thought it was obvious big business runs the government.
Jopin Klobe
(779 posts)... the NRA has no business being involved in the choice of a Judge for the Supreme Court ...
... you've lost all pretense of judgement or ethics ...
... and ...
... you have no business being involved in the running of our country ...
dmm80
(38 posts)dmm80
(38 posts)sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)are arrogantly spitting on their oaths of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States. Their fucking Confederate forebears did the same goddamn thing in 1860 when the called themselves democrats. They were traitors then and they are traitors now.
Rex
(65,616 posts)The GOP needs to die off ASAP, the country cannot take much more of their destructive policies.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)vkkv
(3,384 posts)SCVDem
(5,103 posts)I want the turtle in an NRA jacket and hat.
Truth in obstruction and honesty in loyalty.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)shenmue
(38,503 posts)red dog 1
(27,648 posts)"lame duck session"?
How about "lame Turtle session"?
Jack Rabbit
(45,984 posts)They seem more qualified to do so than the reprobates in the NRA or NFIB. Or the Senate, for that matter, but that's our fault for not holding the Senate to higher standards and letting reprobates like McConnel, Grassley and Cruz into what is ironically called "the world's most exclusive club."
sus453
(164 posts)"the decider".
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)SusanLarson
(284 posts)The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
The Supreme Court has interpreted this provision broadly, saying that any required oath to serve anything other than the Constitution is invalid. In the case of Ex parte Garland, the Court overturned a loyalty oath that the government had tried to apply to pardoned Confederate officials. As the officials had already received full presidential pardons (negating an argument based on their potential status as criminals), the Court ruled that forcing officials and judges to swear loyalty oaths was unconstitutional.
liberalfromaustin21
(61 posts)A typical GOP fascist, and an insane gun nut.
C Moon
(12,188 posts)so he's trying to add more equations and excuses as to why they don't need to add a Justice under a Democratic President.
Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)librechik
(30,663 posts)Criminals, and war criminals.
Since we did nothing about 1963 and nothing about Watergate and nothing in 2001-2003, now they penetrate us from top to bottom and utterly control our voting process and every other aspect of our teeny tiny democracy, (small enough to drown in the bathtub!)
What are we going to do about it? Voting for Coke or Pepsi is not going to change anything. Unelected oligarchs have us all invisibly chained.