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 Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

frazzled

(18,402 posts)
20. Okay, since the New York Times doesn't satisfy you
Tue Sep 22, 2020, 12:13 PM
Sep 2020

Here are the details:

Once the president has made a choice, the nomination is referred to the United States Senate. Since the early 19th century, this has meant that the nomination will first be considered by a smaller group within the Senate, the Senate Judiciary Committee. ...

The Judiciary Committee currently has 22 members – 12 Republicans and 10 Democrats – and has a three-step process of its own.

First, it conducts an investigation into the nominee’s background. This process can take 30 to 45 days, but it’s easy to imagine it going a lot faster.

Second, the committee holds a public hearing, in which the nominee is questioned and may give testimony about everything from her judicial philosophy to her stand on abortion. ... Finally, the committee will report its recommendation to the full Senate as either favorable, negative, or no recommendation.

Once the public hearings have concluded, if the Democrats want to buy time, they can delay the committee vote for a week. But after that, it’s on to the main floor of the Senate.


Okay, in plain English, Trump's nomination will be sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, which Lindsay Graham heads. There are two more Republicans than Democrats on the committee, so if they stick together, the Republicans will always win. They conduct an investigation (which usually takes a long time, but of course they will do it quickly, saying the nominee was already vetted for another position). Then all the committee members get to question the nominee (this means Kamala Harris will get to eviscerate the nominee, which will be enjoyable but useless, since the Republicans have the vote). Then the committee votes to pass it on to the Senate (or not). They will. But the Democrats then will have one lousy week to delay it being sent to the Senate. After that, it's outta there.

So, it goes to the full Senate to debate:

Currently, the Senate is majority Republican, with 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two Independents, who both caucus with the Democrats.

While the Senate has historically followed rules so arcane and incomprehensible that otherwise reasonable writers freely refer to them as “insane,” they can now be changed by a simple majority vote, which simplifies matters for the majority party considerably.

If the motion that the nomination be considered is made during a special “executive” session of the Senate, then the motion itself is debatable and can be blocked by filibuster – that movie-ready delay tactic in which which a senator recites Shakespeare, Dr. Seuss or recipes for fried oysters until everyone gives up and goes home.

But closing debate on the motion so that the Senate could move on to a vote no longer requires a supermajority of 60 votes, just a bare 51-Senator majority. So filibustering is likely to be about as effective as a paper hammer.

After that, the Democrats can insist on a minimum of 30 hours of debate, and then, they will be out of options to delay or stop a confirmation vote.


Okay, this means that the debate starts. But since the ability to end the debate (called "cloture" ) takes only a simple majority of votes under current rules, the Republicans can stop it at any time. The Democrats could then demand 30 more hours of debate, but then it's over. On to the vote.

And we know what that means. Unless four Republicans deflect ... game over.

https://theconversation.com/can-trump-and-mcconnell-get-through-the-4-steps-to-seat-a-supreme-court-justice-in-just-6-weeks-146544

Things will go on as usual. Only worse. Autumn Sep 2020 #1
As it's been since 1980. n/t Yavin4 Sep 2020 #2
Yes. nt Autumn Sep 2020 #4
First - Win the election FBaggins Sep 2020 #3
vote him out..get the senate..pack the courts! samnsara Sep 2020 #5
This Aepps22 Sep 2020 #9
Can I come please? hamsterjill Sep 2020 #14
Nothing if Feinstein has her way. She opposes any significant changes to the court, like more seats LonePirate Sep 2020 #6
She's just about outlived ... LenaBaby61 Sep 2020 #10
Biden is on record as opposing it as well Polybius Sep 2020 #30
He has changed his mind actually. Nothing can be done with a filibuster. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #32
Can you please post a link to him changing his mind? Polybius Sep 2020 #34
Google is your friend... Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #40
It's my enemy today Polybius Sep 2020 #49
Make DC and PR states after we win the WH and Senate in 6 weeks. OrlandoDem2 Sep 2020 #7
a good start NewJeffCT Sep 2020 #23
There won't be much of anything to do if Dems .... LenaBaby61 Sep 2020 #8
Not many means to slow down the process for Democrats frazzled Sep 2020 #12
Sorry .... LenaBaby61 Sep 2020 #15
Okay, since the New York Times doesn't satisfy you frazzled Sep 2020 #20
And that won't happen. WE have to win the election. Winning was always our only chance Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #33
no need to ask that question as we HAVE TO win first beachbumbob Sep 2020 #11
Even if we end up at a 53/47 or 54/46 Senate majority, not only will Celerity Sep 2020 #13
NOT expanding the High Court ... LenaBaby61 Sep 2020 #17
Oh, I agree, I would take it to 15. I just do not see the votes Celerity Sep 2020 #27
So baffling. I thought Bullock was going to be a lock :( n/t moonscape Sep 2020 #51
he has been getting hammered with a massive amount of Rethug negative adverts Celerity Sep 2020 #58
Thanks. What a shame he didn't moonscape Sep 2020 #59
he still can win, he needs Bloomberg and others to pour in a shedload of indirect funding Celerity Sep 2020 #60
That is bullshit. All Dems will vote to do away with the filibuster. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #35
Focus on the election. We can't do a thing to stop the nomination. helpisontheway Sep 2020 #16
We won't be adding states, or packing the court or making any other institutional changes Bradshaw3 Sep 2020 #18
I think about that a lot Merlot Sep 2020 #24
In some ways they were blindsided Bradshaw3 Sep 2020 #39
I don't blame Obama, rather the democratic establishment Merlot Sep 2020 #50
I agree Bradshaw3 Sep 2020 #57
Stop. Democrats are a great party and part of the issue with our situation is people who Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #36
At least have Articles of Impeachment for Tя☭mp and Barr safeinOhio Sep 2020 #19
No, Our strategy is to win the election. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #42
The best strategy is safeinOhio Sep 2020 #45
If we lose, there is no plan possible plan B. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #48
Win in November first TheRealNorth Sep 2020 #21
Sweep the election ooky Sep 2020 #22
We'll start by winning the presidency and a majority in the Senate. MineralMan Sep 2020 #25
Because "we" don't have the power to respond directly. Yavin4 Sep 2020 #26
It is not conducive to winning to announce our intentions before the election. Demsrule86 Sep 2020 #37
Elect Biden, Thomas retires, balance tips back. Initech Sep 2020 #28
No, it wont balance back. Yavin4 Sep 2020 #29
Yeah I realized that. Initech Sep 2020 #38
Why would Thomas retire or Kavanaugh be impeached? Bradshaw3 Sep 2020 #41
Yeah the bad thing about this administration. Initech Sep 2020 #44
Term limits for SC Justices would require a Constitutional Amendment, dware Sep 2020 #55
Liberal Senate votes to remove Kavanaugh? dware Sep 2020 #54
Yeah true, that ain't happening. Initech Sep 2020 #56
Prepare for President-elect Biden's inauguration of course! Baclava Sep 2020 #31
Make DC and puerto rico states and stack the courts jorgevlorgan Sep 2020 #43
Dems have no choice but to play hardball or social liberalism / culture wars are over DSandra Sep 2020 #46
First goal is to win. Personally I'm for expanding the SC but it polls really, really badly, octoberlib Sep 2020 #47
Why do they have to? The system does not provide for "a response." treestar Sep 2020 #52
They won't do a thing. Zilch. d_b Sep 2020 #53
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Trump will get his SCOTUS...»Reply #20