Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Kablooie

(18,571 posts)
3. Obstruction works when you are in the majority.
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 06:55 AM
Dec 2016

Being a solid minority, Dems won't have any say at all.
And wasn't even the filibuster removed for Judges?

madville

(7,397 posts)
11. All judges except SCOTUS
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:10 AM
Dec 2016

Most of his judge picks will get through since they will only need 51 votes.

The question is, do they remove the 60-vote threshold for Supreme Court nominees which has still been in place?

 

Uponthegears

(1,499 posts)
5. Hand-wringing
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 08:15 AM
Dec 2016

IF we assume that Democrats will not use the "5 Minute Majority" to seat Merrick Garland (which might be a fairly safe assumption given past performance combined with Schumer's historic - can't complain right at the moment except for his attack on Obama over the UN abstention - appeasement), Trump's appointee will move the Court about ZERO degrees to the right from where it's been throughout Obama's two terms.

While cases are decided in the district courts, law is made in the Courts of Appeals. There are only 13 vacancies in the Courts of Appeals and none that will change the balance in any Circuit.

The vast majority of vacancies are in the District Courts. Trump's appointments will obviously make a difference AT THE TRIAL LEVEL for any litigants who run into the yahoos Trump appoints but any decision they make will face scrutiny from Courts of Appeals which have been moved at least a little left by Obama's post-nuclear option appointments (Yes, we know most Courts of Appeals remain controlled by conservative judges, but all are better than they were when Obama took office.)

Calista241

(5,584 posts)
7. The "5 minute majority" is completely bogus.
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 08:57 AM
Dec 2016

They can't seat a justice this way, or transact any other business. The Senate can't change the rules by simple majority vote, they can only change precedent.

Rule II, by itself, says that the right to present the credentials of duly elected senators takes precedence over all other motions, except a motion to adjourn.

Rule II reads: The presentation of the credentials of Senators elect or of Senators designate and other questions of privilege shall always be in order, except during the reading and correction of the Journal, while a question of order or a motion to adjourn is pending, or while the Senate is voting or ascertaining the presence of a quorum; and all questions and motions arising or made upon the presentation of such credentials shall be proceeded with until disposed of.

In addition, Rule XXXI states that consideration of nominees may not occur on the “same day on which the nomination is received, nor on the day on which it may be reported by a committee, unless by unanimous consent.” When Biden adjourns the 114th Senate, all nominations awaiting Senate approval will expire and those candidates will have to be renominated before being confirmed. I am sure that Senators Cruz, Tillis, Perdue or Lee; who all serve on the Senate Judiciary Committee, and will not be awaiting Senate credentials, will object to Garlands consideration and prevent the nomination moving forward.

 

Uponthegears

(1,499 posts)
14. Can a majority vote for the suspension of the rules?
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:40 AM
Dec 2016

Just wondering . . . my real point is that the worst case scenario (barring something unforeseen) is that the Supreme Court will be no worse than it was under Obama.

Calista241

(5,584 posts)
16. No, suspension of the rules requires both advance notice and a 2/3 vote, or unanimous consent.
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:58 AM
Dec 2016

This is governed by Rule V of the Senate.

SUSPENSION AND AMENDMENT OF THE RULES

1. No motion to suspend, modify, or amend any rule, or any part thereof, shall be in order, except on one day's notice in writing, specifying precisely the rule or part proposed to be suspended, modified, or amended, and the purpose thereof. Any rule may be suspended without notice by the unanimous consent of the Senate, except as otherwise provided by the rules.

2. The rules of the Senate shall continue from one Congress to the next Congress unless they are changed as provided in these rules.

http://www.rules.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=RuleV

madville

(7,397 posts)
10. It was already changed in 2013
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:07 AM
Dec 2016

When Democrats had 55 seats. All judges except the Supreme Court only require 51 votes so that precedent was already set for whatever rule this Senate decides to adopt. The question is, will they leave the 60 vote rule in place for SCOTUS nominees?

 

Truth321

(93 posts)
8. Harry Reid eliminated filibusters on presidential
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:03 AM
Dec 2016

Appointments. These appointments of trumps will sail thru. Guess someone needs to ask Harry how that turned out.

Vinca

(50,170 posts)
9. You don't think the GOP would have eliminated filibusters if it suited them?
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:04 AM
Dec 2016

Harry's action was the first hint of a spine among the lot of them.

Vinca

(50,170 posts)
13. We're screwed and there's no way around it, fast or slow.
Mon Dec 26, 2016, 09:26 AM
Dec 2016

Even best case scenario - he's impeached for something - we're still screwed with Pence. It's going to be a very long 4 years.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump gets 103 court vaca...