2016 Postmortem

NewJeffCT

(56,848 posts)

8. What I was wondering the other day was

Fri May 20, 2016, 07:49 AM

May 2016

Scalia passed away a few months ago... Clarence Thomas almost always voted in unison with Scalia - they were buddy-buddy. Sometimes, if one partner in an elderly married couple passes away, the other spouse will sometimes die soon afterwards. I wonder if something like that happened with Thomas, Democrats would have a 4-3 edge on the Court, would Republicans suddenly change their minds about Garland?

Also, when the court is deadlocked at 4-4, the lower court decision stands, but it does not set precedent. Does a 4-3 SCotUS decision set precedent? Does it take a full court to set precedent?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Supreme Court is going to drastically change in the next eight years. [View all] NCTraveler May 2016 OP

It won't if corporate dems keep nominating the Merrick Garland's JRLeft May 2016 #1

If we win the White House and Senate and hold on to them there will be no need to nominate upaloopa May 2016 #3

If the democratic party wins the election Garland will be confirmed in December. JRLeft May 2016 #6

even if he is dsc May 2016 #23

If my aunt had nads she'd be my uncle. frylock May 2016 #26

There was no need to nominate him in the first place. ThePhilosopher04 May 2016 #29

Millennials will be the ones most affected time wise by a Trump Supreme court. upaloopa May 2016 #2

It will be horrible for them, spending most of their lives under a right-wing SCOTUS. RKP5637 May 2016 #5

Merrick Garland makes the court 5-4 in the GOP's favor. JRLeft May 2016 #7

There will be several vacancies in the coming years to fill. upaloopa May 2016 #9

We hope so. It's also possible that Thomas and Kennedy live 8 more years. JRLeft May 2016 #11

The "new" democratic party has left me, so I changed to unaffiliated. n/t RKP5637 May 2016 #10

that is complete bullshit dsc May 2016 #24

Democrats want to make cuts to social security and Medicare. JRLeft May 2016 #13

Yep, often D=R. So sad and pathetic. n/t RKP5637 May 2016 #16

If you ask Hillary supporters those democrats are progressives. JRLeft May 2016 #17

It's a split party under one tent with seams breaking. n/t RKP5637 May 2016 #19

The neoliberal control over the party is in its last throws or the democratic party will split. JRLeft May 2016 #20

Yep, many have had it with fake democrats. n/t RKP5637 May 2016 #21

I expect Hillary you be the next president and I expect a ground war. JRLeft May 2016 #22

What I was wondering the other day was NewJeffCT May 2016 #8

Yes 4-3 Sets Precedent Stallion May 2016 #25

THIS is my issue leftynyc May 2016 #4

Koch's list > Heritage Foundation list > Trump's list. Hortensis May 2016 #12

Only if a Democratic candidate wins the White House. samsingh May 2016 #14

? Hortensis May 2016 #15

I can't believe people think Garland and one of these picks would be the same MattP May 2016 #18

The blackmail argument is hard to make when those that allow hard right candidates mmonk May 2016 #27

It is a fact that SC appointments are nominated by the President. NCTraveler May 2016 #31

It's amazing you even have the guts to reply to anything I say. mmonk May 2016 #34

Better get your ass in gear and vote for Bernie Sanders if the Supreme Court is your issue. ThePhilosopher04 May 2016 #28

I voted for Clinton in Florida. NCTraveler May 2016 #30

Yes! Idea? Let's nominate more moderate and lite republicans! YEAH nc4bo May 2016 #32

Until we have full rights in all fifty states, no liberal can call our issues a wedge. bettyellen May 2016 #33