Sanders: McConnell wrong on SCOTUS block (update)

[Omaha Steve]

Last edited Sun Feb 14, 2016, 04:17 PM - Edit history (1)

Source: Politico

By JON PRIOR

Democratic White House hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders said Sunday that Republicans would be wrong to block President Barack Obama’s eventual nominee for the Supreme Court.

“I just don’t think it looks good that for very overtly political reasons that the Republicans would deny this president the right to exercise his constitutional responsibility, which is to appoint members to the Supreme Court,” Sanders said on ABC’s “This Week."

“I don’t think the public would look kindly on Republican actions to try to flaunt what he is supposed to be able to do.”

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other Republicans have said they wanted to wait until after the presidential election before taking up a replacement for Justice Antonin Scalia, who died Saturday.


Bernie Sanders said Republican plans to block a Supreme Court nominee would be "overtly political." | AP Photo


FULL story at link. ORIGINAL story below.

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2016/02/14/bernie-sanders-says-obama-should-be-allowed-to-nominate-supreme-court-justice/

By Yamiche Alcindor

DENVER — Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont pointedly criticized Republican officials for recommending that President Obama hold off on nominating a successor for Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court, who died Saturday.

Speaking on Saturday at an annual fund-raising dinner hosted by the Colorado Democratic Party, Mr. Sanders said Republicans are overlooking the powers given to the president in the Constitution. He chastised Republicans for trying to block President Obama’s ability to nominate a justice for partisan reasons.

“It appears that some of my Republican colleagues in the Senate have a very interesting view of our Constitution of the United States,” Mr. Sanders said. “Apparently, they believe that the Constitution does not allow a Democratic president to bring forth a nominee to replace Justice Scalia. I strongly disagree with that.” (Several Republican candidates said President Obama should let the next president choose the justice or urged the Senate to block the nomination.)

“I very much hope that President Obama will bring forth a strong nominee and that we can get that nominee confirmed as soon as possible,” Mr. Sanders said. “The Supreme Court of the United States has nine members, not eight. We need that ninth member.”

FULL story at link.


Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont during a Colorado Democratic Party dinner in Denver on Saturday.Credit Evan Vucci/Associated Press

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/sanders-mcconnell-wrong-on-scotus-block-219281

[onehandle]

1. ...to undo the damage that corporations, gun nuts, union busters, and haters of women have done.

I agree.

[Bonobo]

5. Derp. nt

[Bluenorthwest]

30. If you'd like, I could post a detailed history of the Union Busting efforts of Haim Saban, Hillary

donor extraordinaire. I'm sure you'd love it. A taste:
SAG Orders Its Members to Refuse To Work on All Haim Saban Shows
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB88612726433571500

Saban, SAG Struggle Over Digimon Dub Dispute
http://www.awn.com/news/saban-sag-struggle-over-digimon-dub-dispute

That is of course Saban Entertainment, Incorporated.

Then we can discuss the impact of DOMA on women denied the rights of marriage and family protections. Hillary strongly defended DOMA and opposed the rights of those women to marry for about 20 years.

Are you really sure you want to talk about these things? We can. But do you really want to?

[onehandle]

38. I was addressing a sitting Senator's correct opinion. Take your divisive threadjack to GD-P. nt

[awoke_in_2003]

65. Thank you

I have GDP blocked for a reason

[A Round Tuit]

2. They cannot stop him from nominating anyone...

But the Senate must confirm.
And unless the nominee meets their majority litmus tests, they will delay, delay, delay.
And nothing Harry Reid or anyone else can do about.
Sorry...just the way it is.

[Dustlawyer]

4. Then we make them pay for it in the General. Their hypocracy over the Constitution can haunt them.

They are quick to point out the parts they like, but things like separation of church and state and equality are lost on them!

[Art_from_Ark]

7. And they've got more than twice as many Senators up for re-election this year

than the Democrats do-- 24 versus 10

[Dustlawyer]

9. Well let's go win 35 races!

[Art_from_Ark]

10. Well, I'm supporting Conner Eldrige in Arkansas

https://connerforarkansas.com/

[24601]

76. Until it's pointed out that Senator Obama voted to filibuster a SCOTUS nomination. He really can't

argue effectively that his own practices shouldn't be applied to his nominations.

[TBF]

8. Beautiful advocating for the Repugs -

but this will kill you with the moderates. Fine, delay. See what happens.

[Xipe Totec]

12. If you saw the Republican cage match last night you know thy don't agree with each other on anything

let alone agree with a Democratic President.

If there is no such thing as consensus for a Republican presidential candidate among Republicans, there sure as hell won't be any consensus on a SCOTUS candidate nominated by a Democratic President.

But that does not mean give up and don't nominate. On the contrary, make the nomination and put the Republicans on display before the country.

Let's see another cage match.

[SusanaMontana41]

67. YES! NOMINATE!

We the People can puts LOTS of pressure on Yertle and Co.

I'm unemployed. All the time in the world to make phone calls to whomever.

A demonstration in D.C.? I'm in. Wherever. Whenever.

[nxylas]

35. Replace "unless" with "if" and it'll still be true

Obama could raise Scalia from the dead and nominate him and they'd still oppose it.

[BlueJazz]

42. Sorry, nxylas, I couldn't resist!

[SusanaMontana41]

64. AGREE. nt

[Doitnow]

75. And as Bernie will say,

"Not Bernie Sanders, or Hillary Clinton ----or one person ALONE can get it done, but when Millions of People get together"-----you know the rest. GOOOOOOO, Bernie!

[me b zola]

41. And those up for re-election could be voted out for it

The public is mad and beginning to take action. The president should swing for the fences in his nomination. If the nomination isn't confirmed it will benefit the Dems.

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

74. Yes, make lemonade with the lemon. n/t

[jalan48]

3. Of course he should. He's President for almost one more year.

[Xipe Totec]

13. And he was elected by the people. nt

[jalan48]

14. Exactly-somehow the right wingers have special rights.

[GGJohn]

18. What special rights?

Oh, you mean those special rights conferred upon the Senate by the Constitution?
You know, those special rights that say the Senate is tasked with either confirming, rejecting or taking no action on a President's SC nominee?
Those special rights?

[Xipe Totec]

21. Did Obama say Senators should not vote on the nomination?

You seem to be saying the President should not exercise his power to nominate.

Is that what you are saying?

[GGJohn]

27. You really mis-interpreted my post.

No, that's not what I'm saying in the least, he should and will nominate a SC candidate, and the Senate should fulfill their Constitutional duties, which is either confirm, reject or take no action.
I was responding to the person who claimed that RW'er's have special rights in regards to the Pres. SC pick.

[jalan48]

22. No-those special rights that allow them to block the nomnation

of a Supreme Court nominee for almost a year because it's an election year. I can't recall Democrats doing anything of this sort. It fits right in with their special right of shutting down the government if they don't get their way. Those kinds of special rights that Democrats don't seem to have.

[William Seger]

25. I expect they'll just say...

... the Founding Fathers gave the Senate the power to confirm so that it would be a partisan process. I don't think there's any way around it; Obama will be obliged to play politics with it for a year, but I think he can handle it.

[jalan48]

29. I agree. I think Obama is going to really enjoy fucking with them.

He has nothing to lose. He can make them look incredibly bad which will help the Democratic nominee.

[SMC22307]

48. Really? I don't see him doing that at all.

Starting with his weak "I plan to nominate" statement. He doesn't like confrontation and expects everyone to get along -- it's more likely he'll nominate someone highly palatable to Republicans. We'll see.

[jalan48]

53. I hope not. I guess I'm optimistic at this point though given his past actions you may be right.

He certainly wanted to get to work with the Republicans on "fixing" Social Security and passing the TPP. My guess is that we will get a Justice that is liberal on social issues and conservative (read Wall Street friendly) on economic ones. Kinda like one of our current Democratic nominees for President.

[SMC22307]

60. It'll be interesting to watch this play out...

more fodder for political junkies. Primaries, caucuses, and SCOTUS nominees... oh, my!

[jalan48]

62. Yes-what we do.....

[SusanaMontana41]

68. This is your legacy, Mr. President. Right here. Right now.

Seize it, Mr. President.

[AlbertCat]

63. someone highly palatable to Republicans.

Just what we need.... another Roberts!

[GGJohn]

28. Again, what special right?

It's in the Constitution, Democrats have those same exact rights as the repukes, the difference is that the Democrats exercise those rights more responsibly.

[jalan48]

33. So you're arguing that Democrat's should shut down the government or block nominees for a year?

Not only does shutting down the government effect the economy it plays right into the Republican line that the government doesn't work and needs to be privatized in many cases. This is what they want-to show American's our system doesn't work.

[GGJohn]

36. No, that's not what I'm saying,

I'm saying that the Democrats have the same exact rights, under the Constitution, as the repukes do, the vast difference is that the Democrats exercise those rights far more responsibly.

[jalan48]

39. I'm not sure shutting down the government is a "right" nor is blocking a nominee for almost a year.

[GGJohn]

40. There is nothing in the Constitution that says there is a timeline to

confirming, rejecting a SC nominee, although there should've been.
See, that's the difference between Dems and repukes, the Dems would have taken it up as soon as the Pres. put forth a nominee, while the repukes will dither and obstruct his nominee, it's not illegal or treasonous, as some have suggested, it's irresponsible and asshattery.

[GGJohn]

16. As were the Senators and House members. eom.

[Xipe Totec]

19. Your point?

McConnel said:

“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,”

As if Obama was not elected by the people.

Did you hear Obama ever say that senators were not?

[GGJohn]

20. You're reading far too much into my comment.

I just pointed out that the Congress is elected by the people also.
Have a great Valentine's day.

[Xipe Totec]

23. In the context of this conversation your reply is a non-sequitur

We are talking about a senator saying that President Obama should not nominate a candidate for the Supreme Court because "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice" as if this current President does not represent the voice of the American people, but the next President will. That is obscene.


And you can dispense with the Valentine's Day pleasantries.

[GGJohn]

32. ...

And you can dispense with the Valentine's Day pleasantries.

Naw, I'll still wish you a happy Valentine's day, just because I'm a nice guy.

[berningman]

6. republicans need to be taken out with the trash

[madokie]

49. I get the feeling that is fixing to happen

We're going to elect Bernie and wind up with a strong majority in the Senate and after the first mid term we'll have the house back. We'll make inroads in the house in this election and then finish that off in '18.

My prediction

We Americans are pissed and getting more so every day.

Welcome to DU berningman

[still_one]

11. he's right, but the republicans will block

[geologic]

45. The Repuglycans will Brock...

[curiouso]

15. A real Page turner...

I’d like to put forth the name of Alan Page to replace Associate Justice Antonin Scalia. It has been far too long since we had a former football star on the High Court. (Byron “Whizzer” White passed away more than a decade ago.) But Page wouldn’t bring just NFL All-Star credentials to the job. He’s black, you know, and would go a long way toward providing the Court with the sort of racial balance that reflects that of the entire nation – while at the same time providing a counterbalance for Associate Justice Clarence Thomas’s unquestioning approach to the cases that come before the Court. As a bonus, Page has had a distinguished career on the Minnesota Supreme Court, where he not only was an Associate Justice but a member of the three-judge panel that heard the election contest brought by Norm Coleman in 2008. And as an added bonus, he’d save taxpayer dollars because he already owns a black robe.

[houston16revival]

17. "I can see Scalia from my house!"

What? Sarah Palin hasn't weighed in yet?

[MissDeeds]

24. That's our Bernie

The voice of reason.

[fredamae]

26. No matter whom you support

It is Time for us All to stand up To the #GOP against their Nomination Blocking Bull Shit, en masse’ – We have witnessed and indeed many have experienced the incredible Harm caused by the rulings of a Fanatical, Koch Bros/Corporate Friendly, Racist Justice. This is about our country first. We Must have sanity and fairness restored to the SCOTUS. IMO, of course.
This time "NO" will Not be accepted from the GOP. We cannot allow Their Obstruction to continue. Election year or Not.

[Bluenorthwest]

31. Names to know- Seante Judicary Committee Members

http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/about/members

[Cryptoad]

34. Thats Brilliant Bern

Constitution gives him the right to appoint justices..

[Omaha Steve]

43. Insult this candidates quote too from LBN

Mrs. Clinton rebuffed the argument by Republicans that a Supreme Court justice should not be appointed in an election year.

[SammyWinstonJack]

44. Ugh.

[geologic]

46. Yep, smart guy...

[SMC22307]

51. Sanders clearly states that.

Camp Weathervane is getting worked up over the manipulative headline... guess it's easier than reading the entire article.

[redwitch]

55. Do we have to fight even about the things we agree on?

[awoke_in_2003]

66. How about keeping that shit in GDP?

[Loki]

37. How exceeding gracious of him.

It's his job Bernie, and yours to advise and consent.

[geologic]

47. Yes indeed, very gracious...

[SMC22307]

54. Sanders is gracious. He also understands the Constitution.

And if you read the entire article, rather than allowing yourself to be manipulated by a headline, you'd understand that.

[MissMillie]

50. There is almost another year before another president takes office

Why shouldn't President Obama nominate someone?

In his 7 years, he hasn't had the opportunity. (Not that everyone deserves an opportunity....)

The Senate will make this hard for him. No doubt.

[SMC22307]

52. Sotomayor and Kagan. (n/t)

[nolabels]

58. I was kind thinking he will make it hard on the Senate

Or even they might make hard on each other, at any rate, i would expect another year of gridlock

[Enthusiast]

56. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch!

[abelenkpe]

57. Republicans reminding voters that they work

Hard to do no work, to block legislation and nominees, to do whatever possible to gum up and slow down the work of government right before an election doesn't seem like a good idea. Never going to understand why people elect politicians who hate government.

[Duval]

59. K&R! nt

[rocktivity]

61. There's no frigging "Should Be Allowed" about it

It's the president's goddam JOB, and congress in particular had better help if they want to keep THEIR jobs!


rocktivity

[RoccoR5955]

69. Much better than

what Clinton has said, that this is disappointing. Strongly disagreeing is more like it. I would like it better if he was outraged, but Bernie does not do outrage.

[turbinetree]

70. Article II Section 2 paragraph 3 and 4

"He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments.

The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session."


ad·vise
[ədˈvīz]
VERB

1.offer suggestions about the best course of action to someone


con·sent
[kənˈsent]
NOUN

1. permission for something to happen or agreement to do something

VERB

1. give permission for something to happen


http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/92/inferior-officers

http://www.heritage.org/constitution/#!/articles/2/essays/93/recess-appointments-clause


So, if Turtle lips and his right wing boy(s) and girl(s) and want to play chicken----------------------they lose-------------------yippie



Thirty years of his right wing "stuff" has done so much damage-----------------I feel like Ronnie Reagan is also starting to leave the building--------------------except------------------ there is one justice still on the court from that time frame ------------Anthony Kennedy-----------------and that legacy will live on .................. this is why this election is so important



Honk-----------------------for a political revolution Bernie 2016

Democracy begins with you----------------tag your it---------------Hartmann / Sanders

Democracy is not a spectator sport----------------get involved--------------Hartman

It is about getting a Progressive President, U.S. Supreme Court, Congress, State and Local Legislatures

[treestar]

71. Headline is terrible

Bernie did not state is that way. "Should be allowed?" Ridiculous. He has the right to.

[alcibiades_mystery]

72. "Allowed to..." It's completely unambiguous in the Constitution that he's "allowed to"

Indeed, he is obligated to.

[LiberalLovinLug]

73. That's ok, if they actually prefer a President Sanders nominee

Obama would hand them another "moderate" ie(economically conservative/socially liberal) nominee. One that will support the increasingly safe populist backing of things like gay marriage rights, while solidifying the rule of the Corporocracy. With Sanders all bets are off.

[TryLogic]

77. Someone tell the Senate Republicans to stop acting like their leader is a member of the KKK.

[YOHABLO]

78. These discussions are getting very very annoying. Everybody just CHILL ..please.

[Dont call me Shirley]

79. The gop-heads are acting like rabid foxes.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

80. They should know that Bernie will nominate more liberal judges than Obama.