General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOnce we control the White House and the Senate, perhaps we need to establish a rule
for a cutoff of when a supreme court vacancy should be filled.
Nine month before the next inauguration? Six month?
StClone
(11,683 posts)Under The Radar
(3,401 posts)The president has the duty to nominate and the senate has the duty to confirm. It should have been fought by a Obama, taken to the court then.
At any time the president has the duty to nominate.
OAITW r.2.0
(24,455 posts)I think he made a calculation to not make this an election year issue and Hillary would win. Obviously, the electoral college voided Hillary's popular vote win.
Being the dickhead that McConnell is, he would have held up Hillary's SC nominations as well.
But I think more and more Americans are realizing that the McConnell Senate is where the real abuse of power is happening. They did acquit the current occupant who was impeached in the House. They are active partners in Trumps bid to turn the US into a Single Party Country....just like Russia, just like China, and many other 3rd world Republican shitholes.
FBaggins
(26,729 posts)There is no "duty to confirm". One could argue that there was a duty to at least vote on a nominee, but that standard had already been violated.
None of this is an actual legal problem. They're just exercises (or abuses depending on whose ox is gored) of political power. The complaining is not intended to result in legal consequences but political ones. The argument isn't that they can't do it... but that they shouldn't.
Under The Radar
(3,401 posts)Obama was the consummate moderate, non confrontational and yes just knew Hilary was going to win.
beachbumbob
(9,263 posts)genxlib
(5,524 posts)With our luck, it would just make us miss out on our next opportunity.