Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

by **TenuredVulture** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:41:51

In the meantime, a number of decisions likely to be 5-4 will now be 4-4, and the lower court ruling will stand. So, we get clean air, and public sector unions for at least the time being. Also, I think we get to keep abortion rights for a little longer.

True fact: I met Scalia once.

by **mcare89** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:43:08

Gimpy wrote:If I was Obama, I'd nominate a judge who's pretty far to the left. Either he/she would get approved or in nine months when it's election time, the democrats can point the finger at republicans for being obstructionists who refuse to get anything done.

I think I'd go the opposite way and nominate somebody who's more of a left-leaning centrist. If Obama nominates an ultra-liberal justice, of course it's going to get beat down, but if he nominates somebody far closer to the middle and even that gets shot down, then you can really hammer home the obstructionist point.

by **JUburton** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:46:32

TenuredVulture wrote:In the meantime, a number of decisions likely to be 5-4 will now be 4-4, and the lower court ruling will stand. So, we get clean air, and public sector unions for at least the time being. Also, I think we get to keep abortion rights for a little longer.

True fact: I met Scalia once.

I believe it does not become precedent then. So can it go back to the SC again after that?

by **Stay_Disappointed** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:48:20

PhillieMooDo wrote:
ReadingPhilly wrote:some reporting scalia died.

This news can only be considered great

by **pacino** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:48:25

by **Gimpy** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:52:20

mcare89 wrote:
Gimpy wrote:If I was Obama, I'd nominate a judge who's pretty far to the left. Either he/she would get approved or in nine months when it's election time, the democrats can point the finger at republicans for being obstructionists who refuse to get anything done.

I think I'd go the opposite way and nominate somebody who's more of a left-leaning centrist. If Obama nominates an ultra-liberal justice, of course it's going to get beat down, but if he nominates somebody far closer to the middle and even that gets shot down, then you can really hammer home the obstructionist point.

That's true. Maybe I'd start with a left/center guy and then move a little to the left with each nominee. Every time they shoot one down, it'll make them look worse.

by **JUburton** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:54:45

Gimpy wrote:
mcare89 wrote:
Gimpy wrote:If I was Obama, I'd nominate a judge who's pretty far to the left. Either he/she would get approved or in nine months when it's election time, the democrats can point the finger at republicans for being obstructionists who refuse to get anything done.

I think I'd go the opposite way and nominate somebody who's more of a left-leaning centrist. If Obama nominates an ultra-liberal justice, of course it's going to get beat down, but if he nominates somebody far closer to the middle and even that gets shot down, then you can really hammer home the obstructionist point.

That's true. Maybe I'd start with a left/center guy and then move a little to the left with each nominee. Every time they shoot one down, it'll make them look worse.

It doesn't really work like that, though. Keep doing that and then you're the one not doing it in good faith.

by **JUburton** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:56:15

Also Republicans have an incentive to take someone toward the middle now, especially if Trump is the nominee because that could cause an absolute landslide victory for HIllary and a take back of the Senate and she can nominate basically anyone she wants.

by **pacino** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:56:44

Go for broke

by **JUburton** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 18:57:52

I think it's safe to say that nothing will happen until nominees are decided. After that, who knows.

by **Gimpy** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:00:50

Found this on Twitter

Longest time from nomination to resolution was 125 days. Obama has 342 left in office.

by **pacino** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:02:54

Well, we've been breaking records of late with Obama in office

by **TenuredVulture** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:06:47

JUburton wrote:
TenuredVulture wrote:In the meantime, a number of decisions likely to be 5-4 will now be 4-4, and the lower court ruling will stand. So, we get clean air, and public sector unions for at least the time being. Also, I think we get to keep abortion rights for a little longer.

True fact: I met Scalia once.
I believe it does not become precedent then. So can it go back to the SC again after that?

Well, I'm pulling shit out of my ass now, because I don't really know, but I would think the court would have to grant cert again (and I really have no idea about the power plant ruling just issued, because right now there's a stay on that regulation pending the SC decision) and because time is finite, the court can only take so many cases a term, so some of those cases may just fall by the wayside for the time being. At the very least, I think overturning the appellate court decision would have to wait until next term.

by **Gimpy** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:08:10

If it goes 4-4, the appellate decision is affirmed, but it doesn't become president outside of the circuit that decided.

by **Doll Is Mine** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:08:34

Well...at least he lived long enough to see marriage equality.

by **TenuredVulture** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:08:41

Gimpy wrote:Found this on Twitter

Longest time from nomination to resolution was 125 days. Obama has 342 left in office.

That doesn't sound quite right--but in any event, resolution can simply mean rejecting the President's nomination. I really don't remember how long it took Reagan to go from Bork to Kennedy?

by **td11** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:09:56

ReadingPhilly wrote:some reporting scalia died.

allahu akbar

by **The Crimson Cyclone** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:15:07

"Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality (whatever that means) were freedoms? And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie. Expression, sure enough, is a freedom, but anyone in a long-lasting marriage will attest that that happy state constricts, rather than expands, what one can prudently say."

by **Soren** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:15:48

td11 wrote:
ReadingPhilly wrote:some reporting scalia died.

allahu akbar

I laughed

by gr » Sat Feb 13, 2016 19:29:27

I'll miss him because he was far and away the best writer on the bench.

Archived

Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)

Re: Primary Cholers, or the Caucusin' Chat Circle (Politics)