SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 24, 2024, 09:52:34 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning EDIT: looks like it's Garland  (Read 14253 times)
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,082
United States


« on: March 16, 2016, 01:03:06 AM »
« edited: March 16, 2016, 09:14:36 AM by Mr. Morden »

SCOTUS nominee expected as early as this morning, and it looks like it came down to Sri or Merrick.


I'm thinking it's Sri Srinivasan. He got a 97-0 confirmation, in 2013. Almost all of those Senators are still here, and that was well after the Tea Party and Obama-phobia swept the GOP. Yet he still got a unanimous confirmation.

And I know it's probably not an important consideration, especially when it comes to President Obama's methodical rational approach, but it will also be bad optics for the GOP to stand in the way of progress for a (South)Asian-American making history. Especially one so qualified that they, VERY recently, voted to confirm unanimously. In an election year where they've already insulted Hispanic-Americans and African-Americans and Women. While at the same time it would be considered a win by the progressive wing (look at his rulings), simultaneously putting pressure on Republicans too. An all-win situation.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,082
United States


« Reply #1 on: March 16, 2016, 09:22:22 AM »

I hope Starwatcher doesn't mind, but I used my mod powers to include Garland's name in the thread topic title, since everyone's now reporting that it's him.  I'll remove it if Obama surprises us, and announces someone else.  Tongue

Of course, was just about to do it myself
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,082
United States


« Reply #2 on: March 16, 2016, 12:52:50 PM »
« Edited: March 16, 2016, 12:58:04 PM by Blue3 »

They need to get him through the Judiciary Committee first.



The US Senate's Judiciary Committee, which Justice Garland will need a majority of to even go before the Senate Floor:

 Republicans (11)
•Chuck Grassley, Iowa, Chair
•Orrin Hatch, Utah
•Jeff Sessions, Alabama
•Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
•John Cornyn, Texas
•Mike Lee, Utah
•Ted Cruz, Texas
•Jeff Flake, Arizona
•David Vitter, Louisiana
•David Perdue, Georgia
•Thom Tillis, North Carolina

Democrats (9)
•Patrick Leahy, Vermont, Ranking Member
•Dianne Feinstein, California
•Chuck Schumer, New York
•Dick Durbin, Illinois
•Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island
•Amy Klobuchar, Minnesota
•Al Franken, Minnesota
•Chris Coons, Delaware
•Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut


So we need at least 2 of those Republicans to vote to proceed to the Senate Floor.
Logged
Blue3
Starwatcher
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,082
United States


« Reply #3 on: March 16, 2016, 01:41:24 PM »

Graham said he would vote against himself if he were the nominee.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 12 queries.