Democratic Primaries

Celerity

(54,250 posts)

6. I so hope not, Garland will be close to or over 70 by then. In US history only 1 SCOTUS

Fri Jul 5, 2019, 03:24 PM

Jul 2019

nominee who got confirmed has been older. Garland would be the oldest ever to actually be confirmed and then serve.

William Smith was 74 years old when Andrew Jackson nominated him. Smith was confirmed on March 3, 1837, BUT he declined to serve due to his age and died around 3 years later, on June 26, 1840.

If I were to vote in a presidential
primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

61 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Biden Might Renominate Merrick Garland [View all] brooklynite Jul 2019 OP

Of course he should. I strongly feel this way... Skya Rhen Jul 2019 #1

Garland will be too old by then, the oldest initially sat SCOTUS justice in US history, and he is Celerity Jul 2019 #9

Why? He was the centrist Obama mainly picked because he thought the R's would agree. pnwmom Jul 2019 #25

I agree TheRealNorth Jul 2019 #29

I would want to revisit Garland. The Supreme Crt is in such bad shape silentEcho Jul 2019 #2

Garland was the centrist Obama hoped the R's would go along with. n/t pnwmom Jul 2019 #26

That is what I was remembering. Thank you. silentEcho Jul 2019 #39

Fuck no. Replacing Ginsburg with Garland would make the court more conservatie than it is now. WhiskeyGrinder Jul 2019 #3

BULLSHIT SHRED Jul 2019 #4

many more liberal judges than Garland beachbum bob Jul 2019 #5

We need 2 or 3 flaming liberals just to balance scotus. Meadowoak Jul 2019 #8

I so hope not, Garland will be close to or over 70 by then. In US history only 1 SCOTUS Celerity Jul 2019 #6

No thanks. I agree that Garland is a "first-rate person." SouthernProgressive Jul 2019 #7

Great idea for 1 term. He deserves to be on Court. aeromanKC Jul 2019 #10

+1 -K&R onetexan Jul 2019 #11

What "term" ? NT enough Jul 2019 #19

It's a lifetime appointment, so no. n/t pnwmom Jul 2019 #27

They can choose to retire aeromanKC Jul 2019 #37

Who has ever done that? pnwmom Jul 2019 #38

No one has never needed to!! aeromanKC Jul 2019 #43

I think Karma would be if Biden put someone on the court pnwmom Jul 2019 #46

Balanced or aeromanKC Jul 2019 #47

Yes, that would be better. Unfortunately, he's only 71, so he's probably not in a hurry. n/t pnwmom Jul 2019 #48

McConnell will block him and every other judge again unless we win the Senate. TeamPooka Jul 2019 #12

Other than symbolism, why? shanny Jul 2019 #13

more looking backwards... bluewater Jul 2019 #14

It certainly is shanny Jul 2019 #22

He was literally asked about considering renominating Garland Otto Lidenbrock Jul 2019 #32

this OP seems to have mangled the actual question to Biden bluewater Jul 2019 #40

Good point... RHMerriman Jul 2019 #54

Can we not? How about nominating someone younger? NYC Liberal Jul 2019 #15

Garland was the right choice to replace Scalia, not Ginsburg IronLionZion Jul 2019 #16

When Kamala becomes President, I am sure that she will select a young, liberal nominee. No worries.. Skya Rhen Jul 2019 #20

That's ridiculous. To begin with Garland will be close to 70. Why add another person who is Autumn Jul 2019 #17

Once again he demonstrates his truly Voltaire2 Jul 2019 #24

His gaffes were cute when Obama was in charge. I don't want a president who Autumn Jul 2019 #28

My thoughts exactly. JudyM Jul 2019 #50

A bit presumptuous dont u think? onetexan Jul 2019 #56

Nope. Where the rubber meets the road is what matters. I'm not ruling Joe out, but he raised JudyM Jul 2019 #60

I seem to remember that Garland was chosen as a enough Jul 2019 #18

Agreed. Salviati Jul 2019 #21

We can do better. Voltaire2 Jul 2019 #23

Please, no n/t hibbing Jul 2019 #30

Terrible idea BeyondGeography Jul 2019 #31

Lovely. Will he walk this one back? Gore1FL Jul 2019 #33

Walk what back? That Garland is someone he would consider? tritsofme Jul 2019 #36

He shouldn't consider him. Gore1FL Jul 2019 #42

You're reading far too much into what is essentially a nice gesture by Biden tritsofme Jul 2019 #45

I'm 53. I've seen enough nice gestures bare fruit to be wary. Gore1FL Jul 2019 #49

That is your opinion...have you seen our chances in the Senate...Collins is at about 50 %...we lost Demsrule86 Jul 2019 #58

Courts are different matter than elections. nt Gore1FL Jul 2019 #59

Garland was an okay nominee at the time NewJeffCT Jul 2019 #34

It's fine enough as a talking point, but in reality no Democratic president would ever renominate tritsofme Jul 2019 #35

3 points. 1) Biden didn't bring up Garland's name. He was asked if he'd "be open" to highplainsdem Jul 2019 #41

Sure, if he adds 2 more justices mcar Jul 2019 #44

No. nt Blue_true Jul 2019 #51

Wrong answer... Mike Nelson Jul 2019 #52

How about a youngish liberal who could serve on the comradebillyboy Jul 2019 #53

That would be my choice...but consider unless we take the Senate...McConnell will Demsrule86 Jul 2019 #57

Yes! JudyM Jul 2019 #61

He just said he was OPEN to re-nominating him. I don't think he would 5starlib Jul 2019 #55