Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 58 of 58

Thread: SC Justice Breyer to Retire

  1. #31
    How funny it would be if Manchin and Sinema don't vote for Biden's SCOTUS pick, and the seat basically says open until the next election cycle.
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Globalist View Post
    How funny it would be if Manchin and Sinema don't vote for Biden's SCOTUS pick, and the seat basically says open until the next election cycle.
    I'm sure Romney et al. will be glad to take up the slack.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by CaptUSA View Post
    Wow. I mean, I know they're all about someone's identity compared to their qualifications, but I'm still surprised by how brazen they are in admitting it.

    What could be more racist?? There used to be a time when the left would be adamantly opposed to a selection based on the color of someone's skin. In fact...

    Ya well the bad news is in , content of character went out in the 1960's
    Do something Danke

  6. #34
    Biden puts Harris on scotus and picks Clinton as VP then resigns, Buttigeig then becomes VP. Every flavor of democrat is satisfied.

  7. #35
    If they're picking a black woman, doesn't that automatically disqualify Harris who's at most 1/16 black?

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by 69360 View Post
    How is announcing you will only consider a black woman not racist and sexist? Democrats now live in an alternate reality.
    I was curious about that myself.

    When did it become legal to openly use race as a hiring qualification/disqualification in a federal job?
    "Truly, whoever can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    "Truly, whoever can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by TheTexan View Post
    The next SC nominee needs to be carefully vetted to make sure that he or she has the right qualifications and experience.

    In particular, I really think they should be looking for someone that has experience as a professional clown.

    Considering how much clowning the SC does, it doesn't really make sense that none of the current justices have any actual professional experience as a clown.
    "Truly, whoever can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire

  11. #39
    How Republicans Can Block Stephen Breyer’s Replacement
    https://time.com/6142711/joe-biden-s...tephen-breyer/
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  12. #40
    Stacy Abrahams identifies as a black woman.



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    How Republicans Can Block Stephen Breyer’s Replacement
    https://time.com/6142711/joe-biden-s...tephen-breyer/
    Better read the article again.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  15. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Matt4Liberty View Post
    If they're picking a black woman, doesn't that automatically disqualify Harris who's at most 1/16 black?
    Hush. Harris doesn't want people to know she's more indian than she is black.
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge

  16. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Globalist View Post
    Hush. Harris doesn't want people to know she's more indian than she is black.
    Funny, over here, the indians are more black than indian.

    which is why they were always called Monigs.

    it is a special case, where the indigenous tribe was wiped out. later, the few survivors mated with coloreds,
    resulting in the Monig tribe.
    "For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy ... Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed." - J.F.K.

  17. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Snowball View Post
    Funny, over here, the indians are more black than indian.

    which is why they were always called Monigs.

    it is a special case, where the indigenous tribe was wiped out. later, the few survivors mated with coloreds,
    resulting in the Monig tribe.
    Thank you so much for that uplifting tale. The woman's roots are in India, Einstein.
    "Stupidity got us into this mess. Why can't it get us out?"--Will Rogers

    "All I know is what I read in the newspapers, and that's an alibi for my ignorance."--Will Rogers

  18. #45
    "The coloreds" LMAO

    I got news for ya Snowball, you're colored, too!

  19. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty View Post
    I got news for ya Snowball, you're colored, too!

  20. #47

  21. #48



  22. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  23. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    Better read the article again.
    You better.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  24. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    You better.
    I did, but you need to. The article was revised because the author didn't realize that only a majority vote is needed to confirm a SCOTUS nominee. I guess you missed this part:

    "If all Democrats hang together–which I expect they will—they have the power to replace Justice Breyer in 2022 without one Republican vote in support,” said Senate Republican Lindsey Graham, a member of the Judiciary Committee, in a tweet Wednesday.

    The Senate is split 50-50, with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie. A 2013 agreement allows most presidential nominees to be confirmed with simple majority votes rather than a 60-vote, filibuster-proof margin. A 2017 update added Supreme Court nominees at that threshold. Under a power-sharing agreement reached a year ago between Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, that bare-majority threshold still holds for Supreme Court nominees, according to a May 2021 report by the Congressional Research Service, Congress’ nonpartisan research institute.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  25. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    I did, but you need to. The article was revised because the author didn't realize that only a majority vote is needed to confirm a SCOTUS nominee. I guess you missed this part:
    Somebody sent them a memo to stop giving McConnell ideas.
    The edit does nothing to change the original article, it just lies about it.

    The simple majority only applies if the nominee gets through the committee which the nominee will not if the Republicans on the committee unite against him because the committee is split half and half.
    The Demoncrats can then try to bring the nominee directly to the floor but that route still requires a 60 vote threshold.
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  26. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Somebody sent them a memo to stop giving McConnell ideas.
    The edit does nothing to change the original article, it just lies about it.

    The simple majority only applies if the nominee gets through the committee which the nominee will not if the Republicans on the committee unite against him because the committee is split half and half.
    The Demoncrats can then try to bring the nominee directly to the floor but that route still requires a 60 vote threshold.
    The point is that none of this was in the linked article. You apparently thought the link would refer to the original article, but it didn't.

    I'm not familiar with the Senate Judiciary Committe rules on reporting its recommendations on SCOTUS nominees, but you seem to assume that all GOP committee members could band together to prevent any report. Given that this possibility hasn't been reported by the media (even the right-wing media), it's likely not going to happen. In addition, see the following:

    If a majority of its members oppose confirmation, the committee technically may decide not to report a nomination, which would prevent the full Senate from considering it. However, since its creation in 1816, the Judiciary Committee’s typical practice has been to report even those Supreme Court nominations that were opposed by a committee majority,78 thus allowing the full Senate to make the final decision on whether the nominee should be confirmed. 79

    This committee tradition was reaffirmed in June 2001 by the committee’s then-chair, Senator Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT), and its then-ranking Member, Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), in a June 29, 2001, letter to Senate colleagues. The committee’s “traditional practice,” their letter stated, has been to report Supreme Court nominees to the Senate once the Committee has completed its considerations. This has been true even in cases where Supreme Court nominees were opposed by a majority of the Judiciary Committee. We both recognize and have every intention of following the practices and precedents of the committee and the Senate when considering Supreme Court nominees.80

    78 According to CRS data, since its creation in 1816, the Judiciary Committee has reported 109 Supreme Court nominations to the full Senate (while not reporting 8 nominations). Of the 109, seven were reported unfavorably (indicating substantial committee opposition)—those of John Crittenden (1829), Ebenezer R. Hoard (1869), Stanley Matthews (1881), Lucius Q.C. Lamar (1888), William B. Hornblower (1894), John J. Parker (1930), and Robert H. Bork (1987). Two nominations were reported without recommendation—those of Wheeler H. Peckham (1894) and Clarence Thomas (1991).

    79 Of the seven nominations reported unfavorably, two were approved by the Senate (Stanley Matthews and Lucius Q.C. Lamar). Of the two nominations reported without recommendation, one was approved by the Senate (Clarence Thomas).

    80 Sen. Patrick J. Leahy and Sen. Orrin G. Hatch, “Dear Colleague” Letter, June 29, 2001, Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 147, June 29, 2001, p. S7282.

    https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R44236
    Moreover, if a simple majority of the Senate can invoke the “nuclear option” to change the filibuster rule on SCOTUS nominees (as McConnell did in 2017), why couldn’t the Dems change the rule about bringing a nomination to the floor in the absence of a committee report (assuming there is such a rule requiring 60 votes)?
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  27. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Sonny Tufts View Post
    The point is that none of this was in the linked article. You apparently thought the link would refer to the original article, but it didn't.

    I'm not familiar with the Senate Judiciary Committe rules on reporting its recommendations on SCOTUS nominees, but you seem to assume that all GOP committee members could band together to prevent any report. Given that this possibility hasn't been reported by the media (even the right-wing media), it's likely not going to happen. In addition, see the following:



    Moreover, if a simple majority of the Senate can invoke the “nuclear option” to change the filibuster rule on SCOTUS nominees (as McConnell did in 2017), why couldn’t the Dems change the rule about bringing a nomination to the floor in the absence of a committee report (assuming there is such a rule requiring 60 votes)?
    Read it and weep:

    With the Senate split 50-50, the provision of Rule 26 that saved Lindsey Graham in 2020 could now doom a similar Democratic effort in 2022.
    https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/28...cotus-nominee/
    Never attempt to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

    Robert Heinlein

    Give a man an inch and right away he thinks he's a ruler

    Groucho Marx

    I love mankind…it’s people I can’t stand.

    Linus, from the Peanuts comic

    You cannot have liberty without morality and morality without faith

    Alexis de Torqueville

    Those who fail to learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
    Those who learn from the past are condemned to watch everybody else repeat it

    A Zero Hedge comment

  28. #54
    Heard some people suggest Loretta Lynch could be Biden's SCOTUS pick as a callback to when Bill Clinton met with her on the tarmac. Hillary may have promised her a SCTOUS seat and this would be fulfilling that promise.
    "Perhaps one of the most important accomplishments of my administration is minding my own business."

    Calvin Coolidge

  29. #55
    White House confirms Judge J. Michelle Childs under consideration for Supreme Court
    https://thehill.com/regulation/admin...ral-candidates
    Carlone Vakil (28 January 2022)

    The White House confirmed to The Washington Post on Friday that J. Michelle Childs, a federal district judge in South Carolina, is one of several candidates whom the president is considering to be his nominee to the Supreme Court.

    The South Carolina judge is “among multiple individuals under consideration for the Supreme Court,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates told the newspaper.

    However, he also pushed back at news reports that suggested the president was only considering three potential picks, which have often mentioned Childs, Ketanji Brown Jackson from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and California Supreme Court Judge Leondra Kruger.

    “And we are not going to move her nomination on the Court of Appeals while the President is considering her for this vacancy,” Bates told The Post, referring to her nomination last month by Biden to serve on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. “At the same time, reporting indicating that the President is only seriously considering three potential nominees is incorrect.”

    The newspaper noted it is the first time that a name of a possible contender for the Supreme Court nomination has been confirmed by the White House. The development comes as Justice Stephen Breyer announced this week he would be stepping down following the high court’s current term.

    Biden reiterated his plan to nominate a Black woman to the Supreme Court during remarks on Thursday.

    “I’ve made no decision except one: The person I will nominate will be someone with extraordinary qualifications, character experience and integrity,” the president said. “And that person will be the first Black woman ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court. It’s long overdue in my view. I made that commitment during my campaign for president, and I will keep that commitment.”

    Childs has received support from House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.), and he told CNN in an interview on Wednesday that he believed “several Republicans,” including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), would support her if she were chosen.

    The Hill has reached out to the White House for comment.

  30. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Anti Globalist View Post
    How funny it would be if Manchin and Sinema don't vote for Biden's SCOTUS pick, and the seat basically says open until the next election cycle.
    I'm sure Romney et al. will be glad to take up the slack.
    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    [...] House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) [...] told CNN in an interview on Wednesday that he believed “several Republicans,” including Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Tim Scott (R-S.C.), would support [Childs] if she were chosen.
    https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre/s...68551910330374
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 01-30-2022 at 07:55 PM.



  31. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  32. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Swordsmyth View Post
    Read it and weep:

    With the Senate split 50-50, the provision of Rule 26 that saved Lindsey Graham in 2020 could now doom a similar Democratic effort in 2022.
    https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/28...cotus-nominee/
    This, from the article, which addresses the final point in my post:

    Democrats, of course, always have the option to use the nuclear option to ignore this rule. The nuclear option gets its name because it is a procedure by which a simple majority of senators ignore their own rules – and in fact, creates a precedent that forces the Senate to violate them over and over again. Presumably, this would be viewed with suspicion by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., who recently opposed using the nuclear option on Democrat-led legislation to federalize the election system.
    It's one thing to try to use the nuclear option to block legislation like the proposed voting rights act. It's quite another to use it to allow a vote on a SCOTUS nominee, especially one whose confirmation would presumably have no effect on the ideological balance of the Court. Manchin or Sinema might not be so reluctant to use it in the latter case. In addition, someone like Susan Collins could break ranks with the GOP senators and allow the nomination to go to a vote. Heck, even Lindsey Graham might, based on his statements yesterday. But one needs to take anything he says with a huge block of salt, since he's prone to doing about-faces from his previous comments.
    We have long had death and taxes as the two standards of inevitability. But there are those who believe that death is the preferable of the two. "At least," as one man said, "there's one advantage about death; it doesn't get worse every time Congress meets."
    Erwin N. Griswold

    Taxes: Of life's two certainties, the only one for which you can get an automatic extension.
    Anonymous

  33. #58

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. Justice Stephen Breyer speaking crazy things
    By cswake in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-27-2012, 04:11 PM
  2. Justice Breyer warns of Orwellian government
    By Anti Federalist in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 11-10-2011, 07:54 PM
  3. Justice Breyer warns of Orwellian government
    By Miss Annie in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-09-2011, 09:20 AM
  4. Liberal Justice Breyer: Other Side ‘Out to Lunch’
    By bobbyw24 in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-17-2011, 05:04 AM
  5. Justice Breyer on Cameras in the Court
    By Reason in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-07-2009, 03:13 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •