Scalia just died (really). How will this affect the race?

[PeteB]

Interesting development (with heartfelt condolences to Justice Scalia's family).

President Obama could nominate a liberal justice and the GOP could stall the hearings until the election or he could nominate someone moderate and try to find enough Republican support. Either way, this will get both political and ugly!

[Suburbia]

There are no moderate Supreme Court Justices or Senators. Why is that so hard for Atlas to understand? lol

Moderates exist in America. They are some that are tired of the left-right crap.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

There are no moderate Supreme Court Justices or Senators. Why is that so hard for Atlas to understand? lol

Moderate is a very subjective term......

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Well it is now dominating the news cycle, which may make it difficult for candidates to change the state of the race from what is with the exception of the debate tonight.

If Trump wins SC, there might be a desire on the part of some on the establishment to make a deal and support Trump in exchange for promises to appoint a specific person they would find acceptable.

Trump is also a much cheaper candidate because he can self fund and therefore they can throw all of their money at the Senate and screwing with the Democratic nominating process.

The interests move much more towards cutting a deal with Trump both because of fears of Cruz and also inability of the others to gain traction.

[Asian Nazi]

TRUMP will nominate Cruz.

No, TRUMP will appoint an actual American to the court.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

TRUMP will nominate Cruz.

A Canadian pussy? Please, Trump isn't an idiot.

There are no moderate Supreme Court Justices or Senators. Why is that so hard for Atlas to understand? lol

Moderates exist in America. They are some that are tired of the left-right crap.

lol

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

My God, the GOP is already predictably despicable. As if the public didn't know Obama could be appointing more justices when they reelected him in 2012. This always comes up in presidential elections and the public has ALREADY DECIDED what should happen in this instance - Obama gets to make the appointment that should be approved as long as the qualifications as there. Utterly ridiculous.

I honestly don't remember either candidate ever campaigning in the GE on SCOTUS in 2012, and it was never brought up in the GE debates.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

My God, the GOP is already predictably despicable. As if the public didn't know Obama could be appointing more justices when they reelected him in 2012. This always comes up in presidential elections and the public has ALREADY DECIDED what should happen in this instance - Obama gets to make the appointment that should be approved as long as the qualifications as there. Utterly ridiculous.

....then why did the people elect a Republican Senate in 2014? Surely they knew that some of the Justice's would croak too.

Try harder next time, Becca.

[Darthpi – Anti-Florida Activist]

Just thinking out loud here, I have a suspicion that most Trump voters probably care about lots of other issues more than they care about judicial philosophies of any individual Supreme Court justice. As long as he promises to generically "appoint conservatives" he will probably be fine.

At worst, this may temporarily lower Trump's ceiling a bit while it is still a major news headline, but the impact in the primary is probably being vastly overstated.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

There are no moderate Supreme Court Justices or Senators. Why is that so hard for Atlas to understand? lol

Moderate is a very subjective term......

As Atlas proves over and over again.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

What happens if the new President isn't a Republican?

We will have 8 Supreme Court justices until someone else dies, at which point, we will have 7 Supreme Court justices.

So you think it's reasonable to leave vacancies on the court until a Republican is elected President? That's nuts, but whatever.

No, allowing supremacy of Obamabots is nuts. If Obama nominated a real, impartial, centrist justice, that would be acceptable. But he won't.

The President gets to nominate judges, that's how the system works. Let's not even pretend like Republicans would approve anyone other than an extremely right-wing judge. Their idea of fair and impartial is the complete opposite of the what the words mean.

We were elected to control the Senate, not you guys. And we get to confirm/deny nominees to the court. So yeah, that's how the system works.

[tallguy23]

I think this will motivate Democrats more than Republicans. The Dems only have the White House after all.

[BM]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

[ProudModerate2]

Mitch McConnell says no replacement until January 2017.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just in case anyone thought this election wasn't partisan enough.

I find McConnell's comments very premature.
1.) He should show respect towards Scalia's death, and not make any serious comments/decisions on anything related to a replacement until the guy is at least buried. (This goes for everyone in DC.)
2.) He should wait to see what the President does, or who he may nominate. To just say that it is a dead issue (no pun intended) until January is disrespectful to the Constitutional process & looks like complete obstructionism.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

But we do have the privilege of shooting down anyone Obama tries to appoint. Obama has the right to nominate whoever he wants, but not to flat out fully appoint them.

[Attorney General, Senator-Elect, & Former PPT Dwarven Dragon]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

Yes, but the advice and consent clause is there for a reason.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

But we do have the privilege of shooting down anyone Obama tries to appoint. Obama has the right to nominate whoever he wants, but not to flat out fully appoint them.

If the Senate blocks a reasonable nominee, Obama should call them out every single day on it. Every single day.

[Brittain33]

Yup, the Senate majority certainly has the power to provoke a constitutional crisis if they decline to approve any of the President's nominees. It hasn't happened before, but there's nothing other than self-interest to prevent them from breaking the Court.

[henster]

Obama should nominate Sandoval, let them block one of their own.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

For Christ's sake.

It's the President's prerogative to nominate someone for the Supreme Court. The Senate's role to determine their suitability and vote aye or nay. Unless the GOP wants the SC to be useless for a year, they need to do their actual jobs.

The public doesn't know or care about all of the judicial appointments they blocked, because they're Obama's nominees. A Supreme Court justice is something else, and if they try the same bull****, it will blow up in their faces, I guarantee it.

[DrScholl]

Republicans can block whoever they want to, but they cannot control what consequences come from being incredibly obstructionist. This could cost them the Senate and the Presidency, which would make this obstruction an exercise in futility.

[Asian Nazi]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

But we do have the privilege of shooting down anyone Obama tries to appoint. Obama has the right to nominate whoever he wants, but not to flat out fully appoint them.

If the Senate blocks a reasonable nominee, Obama should call them out every single day on it. Every single day.

He'd sound like an idiot and nobody would care

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

But we do have the privilege of shooting down anyone Obama tries to appoint. Obama has the right to nominate whoever he wants, but not to flat out fully appoint them.

If the Senate blocks a reasonable nominee, Obama should call them out every single day on it. Every single day.

He'd sound like an idiot and nobody would care

I disagree. This is the Supreme Court, this can be framed extremely badly for the GOP.

[DrScholl]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

But we do have the privilege of shooting down anyone Obama tries to appoint. Obama has the right to nominate whoever he wants, but not to flat out fully appoint them.

If the Senate blocks a reasonable nominee, Obama should call them out every single day on it. Every single day.

Exactly. The public at large is going to side with the President without a doubt and the GOP will do nothing but weaken their chances at winning in November.

[I Will Not Be Wrong]

The Senate doesn't have the privilege of picking whoever they want for the court.

If the candidates don't mention it themselves, it at least comes up in debates on cable news, written articles, etc. It's part of the job and Obama should be allowed to fulfill it.

But we do have the privilege of shooting down anyone Obama tries to appoint. Obama has the right to nominate whoever he wants, but not to flat out fully appoint them.

If the Senate blocks a reasonable nominee, Obama should call them out every single day on it. Every single day.

Exactly. The public at large is going to side with the President without a doubt and the GOP will do nothing but weaken their chances at winning in November.