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
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)McConnell: No New Supreme Court Justice Until The NRA Approves Of The Nominee [View all]
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/03/20/3761908/mcconnell-no-new-supreme-court-justice-until-the-nra-approves-of-the-nominee/McConnell: No New Supreme Court Justice Until The NRA Approves Of The Nominee
by Ian Millhiser Mar 20, 2016 11:33 am
Supreme Court justices are nominated by the president and appointed with the advice and consent of the National Rifle Association, according to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
McConnell offered this unusual view of the confirmation process during an interview with Fox News Sunday. In response to a question from host Chris Wallace, who asked if Senate Republicans would consider the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court after the election if Hillary Clinton prevails, McConnell responded that he cant imagine that a Republican majority in the United States Senate would want to confirm, in a lame duck session, a nominee opposed by the National Rifle Association and the National Federation of Independent Businesses.
The Majority Leaders statement is significant for several reasons. For one thing, it suggests that his previously stated position that this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President, is a sham. Simply put, its unlikely that the NRA or the NFIB will change their position on a nominee just because Hillary Clinton is president and not Barack Obama.
But its also worth examining exactly who McConnell would give a veto power over nominees. The NFIB, of course, was a plaintiff in NFIB v. Sebelius, the first Supreme Court case seeking to repeal the Affordable Care Act. That lawsuit called upon the justices to impose limits on federal power that even the late Justice Antonin Scalia refused to impose in previous cases (although its worth noting that Scalia abandoned his previous principled stance when given the opportunity to cast a vote against Obamacare). When the NFIB isnt fighting to take health care away from millions of Americans, it fights equally hard against raising the minimum wage.
snip//
So McConnell isnt simply delegating his duty to evaluate potential Supreme Court nominees to the NRA, hes deferring to the NRA despite the fact that the gun lobby groups case against Garland is very thin. It consists of Garlands single vote to rehear a case that one of his courts most conservative members also voted to rehear, along with a decision to allow the FBI to continue to perform audits on the background check system after lawmakers sympathetic to the NRA tried and failed to shut those audits down.
65 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
McConnell: No New Supreme Court Justice Until The NRA Approves Of The Nominee [View all]
babylonsister
Mar 2016
OP
The NRA has legally purchased a timeshare ownership of Congress over the past three decades.
Scuba
Mar 2016
#13
I am also anti death penalty totally. It is very hard sometimes. But if we treat them the way they
LiberalArkie
Mar 2016
#39
To me, anyone we would want killed or imprisoned for life should have no problem
LiberalArkie
Mar 2016
#63
Oh--You meant the "criminals" who were exiled to the "Brithish colonies" of America and Australia
maddiemom
Mar 2016
#64
I was thinking that once we had a justice system instead of a vengeance system something like
LiberalArkie
Mar 2016
#65
Well, any pretense that patriotism or the constitution has ANY meaning to these fucking
Jackie Wilson Said
Mar 2016
#4
Do your job, McTurtle. It's not the NRA'S job. It's not the RNC's job. It's your effing job.
deminks
Mar 2016
#7
I think it's going to be an 8 person supreme court for as long as there's a Democratic President and
Bonn1997
Mar 2016
#19
Gee, the American Bar Association used to be the outfit to vet judicial nominees
Jack Rabbit
Mar 2016
#53