Argument for voting for replacement?

[Oceanmachine]

Just flipped to Fox News

A guy was defending voting for a Justice by saying this more or less. Saying this isnt like the Garland situation.


Do you Agree?

Paraphrasing


"In 2016, the American people had already voted for a Republican senate. The Senate tasked by the American people to do its job. The Senate choose to do what they wanted based on their elected duty. Now Republicans control the Senate again and can carry out the will of the voters who elected them"



Also

From McConnell

 

[Fluffernutter]

Do we really want a tie of 4-4 in the SCOTUS if they are called upon to help unravel a messy vote counting process in November?

 

[Fluffernutter]

Argument against filling the seat:

How Mitch treated Merrick Garland's nomination.

 

[King in the North]

I feel like the smartest thing Republicans could do is wait and hold it out as bait for the election and on the fence conservatives. If they lose they could still rush something through after the election.

 

[Low Test With da Best]

Shitshow preconfirmed

 

[Bloody Pulp]

I was raped by the nominee 27 years ago

 

[Hadron90]

Trump is constitutionally mandated to put forth a candidate. What the Senate does from there is up to them.

Personally, with all this talk of how this may be a contested election, I think its best to have a full Supreme Court.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

Do we really want a tie of 4-4 in the SCOTUS if they are called upon to help unravel a messy vote counting process in November?

On top of assuming Roberts, a reliable conservative if you actually look at SCOTUS decisions as a whole, votes with the liberals, you somehow further assume that a Trump nominated and GOP confirmed appointee would somehow add credibility to a 5-4 decision in favor of Trump.

It would make Bush v. Gore look like child's play.

 

[Kandyland]

I was raped by the nominee 27 years ago

Which party is the candidate? Ill believe you if you say the right thing. #BelieveAllWomen unless it hurts my side.

-Alyssa Milano

 

[Oceanmachine]

On top of assuming Roberts, a reliable conservative if you actually look at SCOTUS decisions as a whole, votes with the liberals, you somehow further assume that a Trump nominated and GOP confirmed appointee would somehow add credibility to a 5-4 decision in favor of Trump.

It would make Bush v. Gore look like child's play.

Is Roberts liberal? I dont pay attention.

Just looking at the court right now. There are 5 republicans of whom all appointed by Republican presidents.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

Is Roberts liberal? I dont pay attention.

Just looking at the court right now. There are 5 republicans of whom all appointed by Republican presidents.

No, not by a long shot. But many right wing conservatives believe he is, erroneously.

He consistently votes more often with the conservative block than the liberal one, save for a few cases.

 

[Bobby 3 Sticks]

I feel like if GOP pushes this threw and dems take wh + Senate we'll be seeing court stacking. There's already been talk of it in the more extreme sides. Fdr threatened it too

 

[Oceanmachine]

No, not by a long shot. But many right wing conservatives believe he is, erroneously.

He consistently votes more often with the conservative block than the liberal one, save for a few cases.

When did he let republicans down then? Save me the trouble of reseaeching it. When did he vote "liberal".

Because all im seeing from the right is that Roberts isnt reliable so they NEED a conservative now so it can be 5 to 4

I feel like if GOP pushes this threw and dems take wh + Senate we'll be seeing court stacking. There's already been talk of it in the more extreme sides. Fdr threatened it too

Yeah its all gone. There is no going back. People want to win an election barely then rule with tyranny over the other half the population with revenge.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

When did he let republicans down then? Save me the trouble of reseaeching it. When did he vote "liberal".

Because all im seeing from the right is that Roberts isnt reliable so they NEED a conservative now so it can be 5 to 4



Yeah its all gone. There is no going back. People want to win an election barely then rule with tyranny over the other half the population with revenge.

We'll, I'd guess they'd point to Roberts' decision upholding the ACA ((Obamacare) as number one, holding that it is legal under Congress' taxation power.

More recently, he sided with the liberal bloc in striking down Trump's attempt to override DACA.

He also sided with the liberals and Gorsuch extending federal civil rights employment protections to transgendered persons.

However, if you look at the stats overall, he is reliably conservative.

https://www.scotusblog.com/ has great stats.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

When did he let republicans down then? Save me the trouble of reseaeching it. When did he vote "liberal".

Because all im seeing from the right is that Roberts isnt reliable so they NEED a conservative now so it can be 5 to 4



Yeah its all gone. There is no going back. People want to win an election barely then rule with tyranny over the other half the population with revenge.

I think their 'concern' is vastly overblown. Especially considering they're relying on a rushed through hard right nominee to be the deciding vote on a contested election. Surely would only exacerbate the partisanship

 

[Clifford_Harris]

We'll, I'd guess they'd point to Roberts' decision upholding the ACA ((Obamacare) as number one, holding that it is legal under Congress' taxation power.

More recently, he sided with the liberal bloc in striking down Trump's attempt to override DACA.

He also sided with the liberals and Gorsuch extending federal civil rights employment protections to transgendered persons.

However, if you look at the stats overall, he is reliably conservative.

https://www.scotusblog.com/ has great stats.

I believe he also sided with the liberals against Louisiana's abortion law that would have forced all the clinics in the state to close.

 

[BKMMAFAN]

I believe he also sided with the liberals against Louisiana's abortion law that would have forced all the clinics in the state to close.

Forsooth. Though I think that was a sneaky adherence to stare decisis that could be revisited with a more direct confrontation of Roe.

 

[ocean size]

Just flipped to Fox News

A guy was defending voting for a Justice by saying this more or less. Saying this isnt like the Garland situation.


Do you Agree?

Paraphrasing


"In 2016, the American people had already voted for a Republican senate. The Senate tasked by the American people to do its job. The Senate choose to do what they wanted based on their elected duty. Now Republicans control the Senate again and can carry out the will of the voters who elected them"



Also

From McConnell

I don't see why they bother pretending it was some kind of rule with a basis in precedence. McConnell himself admitted it was just not going to happen regardless as long as they could stop it.

 

[ArmenianAssasin]

I feel like the smartest thing Republicans could do is wait and hold it out as bait for the election and on the fence conservatives. If they lose they could still rush something through after the election.

Lmao

 

[ArmenianAssasin]

I feel like if GOP pushes this threw and dems take wh + Senate we'll be seeing court stacking. There's already been talk of it in the more extreme sides. Fdr threatened it too

won’t happen

and Dems shouldn’t of removed the filibuster - this is clearly to blame for any imbalance that may except - not the number of justices