Democrats see 'cracks' in Republican block of Merrick Garland confirmation

[Eugene]

Source: The Guardian

Republican opposition to the nomination of a supreme court justice is crumbling now that the “stellar” Merrick Garland has been put forward, senate Democrats claimed on Thursday.

The Republican leadership is holding out against senate confirmation hearings or a vote after Barack Obama named Garland to replace conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who died last month. Republican senators insist that the next president should make the selection.

But Chuck Schumer, Democratic senator for New York, said in response to a question from the Guardian on Thursday: “We are seeing cracks on the Republican side. About five or six members have agreed already to meet with the nominee and I think what happened is they saw how stellar the nominee was and they realised how bad it would be not to ... They’re feeling the heat and we believe we’ll see many more cracks over the next two weeks.”

Schumer and other Democratic senators addressed reporters outside the supreme court ahead of Garland’s first meetings on Capitol Hill on Thursday afternoon. He was due to make courtesy calls on Democrats Harry Reid and Patrick Leahy but not on Republicans.

[font size=1]-snip-[/font]


Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/mar/17/merrick-garland-senate-hearing-republican-block-democrats-supreme-court

---

David Smith in Washington
Thursday 17 March 2016 19.10 GMT

[proverbialwisdom]

1. #4 mentioned on WADR on Bloomberg.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/03/16/five-things-merrick-garland/81853926/

[KJG52]

2. "Stellar"- Merrick Garland

Last edited Thu Mar 17, 2016, 08:12 PM - Edit history (1)

A lawyer from a white shoe law firm, a "centrist," judge on one of the most conservative appellate courts in the 20th century, with no stated position on voting rights. campaign finance, environmental justice, work place fairness, equality for women, in fact, not "stellar," just another corporate drone. Another sell out of Democrats in the name of political expediency, and Obama's famed 11th dimensional chess ability...

[CTyankee]

5. I simply don't think Obama would sell out women and those in the struggle for economic

equality for just a score for the SCOTUS. He did what he had to do in appointing a centrist who will doubtless turn more left once on the court. This is what happens and it will follow suit, I am convinced...

[KJG52]

12. I disagree, the "nowhere" man isn't a liberal or progressive

and there is no guarantee of a "left turn" once he is on the court, as far as I know, he's a law and order Clintonite with a pro-business bent, which doesn't sound very "left," to me...

[CTyankee]

20. yes, he is more of a centrist but he has not chimed on on reproductive freedom. However,

he seems to be more of a "stare decisus" guy so my guess is that he favors the outcome of Roe v. Wade...

[riderinthestorm]

22. Obama's support of TPP already demonstrates he'd sell out women and economic equality

[scscholar]

3. They are obstructing!

There has been no vote yet. No vote yet.

[Cryptoad]

4. I'll bet the black bottom land

he will be the most conservative justice the GOP will have a chance to confirms for the next 8 years

[blackspade]

7. That is definitely the case with Sanders as PONTUS!

Here's hoping he pulls it out!

[blackspade]

6. I'm not remotely happy with this nomination.

The repubs are going to get their pro-business conservative.
This is such a wasted opportunity to put an actual progressive on the SCOTUS.
Bummer.

[greyl]

8. Don't worry, you'll love the next two.

This one is just about perfect for the situation.

[blackspade]

10. Why will I love the next two?

Unless Sanders wins, it will be more triangulating corporatists nominated to the bench.

[Skittles]

11. I think it has something to with chess, or something stupid like that

[NobodyHere]

24. You think the Republicans would vote for a progressive?

[blackspade]

25. A typical no we can't response.....

So I guess we will just continue to do what the rethugs want then.

[NobodyHere]

26. So in what scenario would Republicans vote for a progressive SC nominee?

[blackspade]

27. that's not the point.

The point is that you don't start a negotiation on your opponents terms.
How is that hard to understand?

[NobodyHere]

28. It's exactly the point

Why appoint a nominee that couldn't possibly make it through?

[blackspade]

29. you obviously do not understand how negotiations work

especially when your opponents suck as bad as the Republicans.

[NobodyHere]

30. Exactly what do you gain in negotiations by nominating a progressive?

Republicans would vote the nominee down and would be applauded for it. It doesn't exactly move the needle our way.

[blackspade]

31. So what are you arguing for then?

Appeasement? That's worked great for the last 30 years....

[NobodyHere]

32. I'm talking about working with the system we have to get the best result.

Tell me what nominating a progressive judge would accomplish at this point? How would it help negotiations?

[blackspade]

33. And what is the best result for the nation?

Another center right corporatist judge? No thanks.
The point of a negotiation is to start with with your most favored position and then work toward your opponents position.
NOT to start with your opponents likely negotiated position and work towards their most favored position.
The 'pragmatism' that has infected the Democratic Party via 'liberal' Repigs, that set up shop in the 90's, has led to a system of appeasement that has created a political death spiral for the American electorate while enriching our corporate and political classes. The Democrats in DC don't negotiate anymore, they triangulate to a position favorable to the GOP.
I had hoped that Obama would make a principled stance and nominate a liberal to the court to start with, but that seems to not be the case. He chose a nominee that the GOP actually would like to have on the bench.
Now he could go more liberal with the next nominee, but I'm afraid he will go further right on the next round.

I guess we will see.

[jade3000]

9. Who advises senate Democrats?!

So the senate Democrats have an excellent argument against the Republicans -- don't play politics with the Supreme Court nomination, instead do your job and have confirmation hearings and vote. It's a simple, straightforward, powerful position. It may get the nominee through, get some votes for Dems in November, or both.

Next thing I see ... Senate Democrats are grandstanding behind at a press conference behind a sign shating "America says to senate Republicans: Do Your Job"

How stupid can you get? The whole argument is to NOT play politics with the Supreme Court, and you right away play politics in such an obvious way with a blatant visual that can be easily turned against the Dems.

Argh!

[lagomorph777]

23. "Do your job" is simple, catchy and true! I think it's fine.

And while we're at it, I believe the Department of Treasury writes the paychecks for these goldbricking Senators. DOT is Executive Branch, and therefore could be ordered to stop writing those paychecks

[jalan48]

13. Oh Goody! Another corporate justice. I can't wait!

[mpcamb]

19. God-only-knows what's been promised away.

And who are the 5-6 who're 'cracking' and what'll they demand?

Hold your applause, chess fans.

[truebluegreen]

14. Oh goody!

We may get a new corporate justice to solidify Obama's legacy!

[riderinthestorm]

15. My senator Mark Kirk is one of them and it's because he fears losing to Duckworth

Im glad he may go out doing a good thing but can't wait til Senator Duckworth takes his seat.

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. Obama picked a guy from Lincolnwood who went to Niles West High School

That makes him pretty much a hometown boy for the entire north suburbs (i.e., Kirk's delta in any Illinois statewide election). Kirk's going to fold on this like a cheap suit, I guarantee it.

[riderinthestorm]

18. He already has. Said he'll meet with him.

he broke ranks with the Senate leadership even before Garland was announced.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

16. Thanks Mr President

...

[CharlotteVale]

21. Whoopee.