Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The coming battle of the appointment of next Supreme Court
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The coming battle of the appointment of next Supreme Court judge will dominate US politics throughout the WH2016 campaign
This is how the New York Times is reporting the ensuing battle in Washington over the appointment of a replacement on the Supreme Court for Justice Scalia who died over the weekend.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/texas-tv-station-scalia-died-of-a-heart-attack/2016/02/14/938e2170-d332-11e5-9823-02b905009f99_story.html
Brussels trying to bypass national governments again.
Our ruling
Rubio said, "There comes a point in the last year of the president, especially in their second term, where you stop nominating" both Supreme Court justices and Court of Appeals judges. Rubio suggested that point is now.
The chance for an outgoing president to make a Supreme Court nomination in his last year in office has only happened once in the past century, in 1968.
But presidents do continue to nominate appellate judges in their final year. Out of the last four presidents who served two terms, all of them made nominations to the Court of Appeals (as well as the District Courts) in their last year.
We rate Rubio’s claim False.
This took 10 seconds of googling:
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/02/alex-jones-was-antonin-scalia-murdered
Like I said this is kid gloves time from the EU, Just wait until the vote is won for remain the demands will be utterly merciless and overwhelming.
There are those, like the doctor who wrote his death certificate, who believe the rotund 79-year-old died in the night of a heart attack suffered during a quail-hunting holiday in Texas.
Then there are those who believe he was murdered, perhaps by a CIA agent using a "heart attack gun", probably working on the orders of President Barack Obama, who is in all likelihood some sort of Muslim sleeper agent born in either Kenya or Indonesia, but certainly not in Hawaii as is stated on his birth certificate.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/antonin-scalias-death-sets-off-hysteria-conspiracy-theories-20160215-gmu75m.html#ixzz40DXo8ZRo
I mean seriously, who would go to Texas to go quail-hunting?
The old American virtues have already been eaten away by cosmopolitans and intellectuals; the old competitive capitalism has been gradually undermined by socialistic and communistic schemers; the old national security and independence have been destroyed by treasonous plots, having as their most powerful agents not merely outsiders and foreigners as of old but major statesmen who are at the very centres of American power."
Richard Hofstadler The Paranoid Style in American Politics 1964
http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/
Not just America......and not just fifty years ago......
England cricket again showing that in limited overs matches, it is vitally important to use all the available overs. They really should have won the 1D series after being 2-0 up.
Good news for the govt, or rather bed news avoided, with the decision of HSBC not to relocate.
Much more fun for Obama to select the most outrageous screaming liberal he can find and watch the GOP implode in a paroxysm of rage and bickering about who would be the best candidate to stop any more of this nonsense, whilst annoying the independent voters by dragging everything out forever.
If the UK Supreme Court effectively becomes the UK Constitutional Court through the forthcoming British Bill of Rights (and its powers could only be enhanced through a Leave vote) could we eventually see similar political battles over judges here?
One would probably default to "no", particularly since PMs do not appoint our judges, but if our Supreme Court starts to become the ultimate arbiter of human rights law in the UK then it could end up in future attracting not much less controversy than the ECHR.
From a quick read of history the majority of appointments are sorted out in a couple of months. It will be very difficult to string it out through the summer without one side or the other looking very stupid.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/12/ted-cruz-we-are-one-liberal-justice-away-from-a-five-justice-liberal-majority/
“We are one liberal justice away from a five justice liberal majority, the likes of which this country has never seen,” 2016 presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said Tuesday at the Red Arrow Diner in New Hampshire with radio hosts Andrew Wilkow and David Webb on The Wilkow Majority radio program on SiriusXM Patriot 125.
“The next president could get up to four Supreme Court justices,” Cruz said
The problem appears to be actually the reverse, the Democrats want the President to be able to appoint a justice without the inconvenience of asking the Senate to approve it, as required by the Constitution.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_Kingdom#Appointment_process
appointment process for Justices of the Supreme Court. A selection commission is to be formed when vacancies arise. This is to be composed of the President and Deputy President of the Supreme Court and a member of the Judicial Appointments Commission of England and Wales, the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland and the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission. In October 2007, the Ministry of Justice announced that this appointment process would be adopted on a voluntary basis for appointments of Lords of Appeal in Ordinary.[28]
The commission selects one person for the vacancy, and notifies the Lord Chancellor of its choice. The Lord Chancellor then either
approves the commission's selection
rejects the commission's selection, or
asks the commission to reconsider its selection.
If the Lord Chancellor approves the person selected by the commission, the Prime Minister must then recommend that person to the Monarch for appointment.[29]
New judges appointed to the Supreme Court after its creation will not necessarily receive peerages; however, they are given the courtesy title of Lord or Lady upon appointment.[30][31] The President and Deputy President are appointed to those roles rather than being the most senior by tenure in office.
It's badly worded, what happens if the senate refuses to consent to his appointments for ever.
The constitution doesn't specify a size for the court, that's done by an act of congress
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2016-02-15/poll-points-to-five-party-senedd-as-ukip-support-grows/
Turks are denying they had troops (around 100) enter Syria:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-35576458
And Leave are ahead by 45-37% in Wales.
(Also the future of vellum is secured - phew!)
Straw stuck to the facts
Apparently unless we vote In, the EU will be spiteful to us. And move away from us. Well since they're moving away from us already and we feel hard done by rather often now - I'm not sure how this argument works.
And it's getting panned. Justly. Remain needs to sort this out. I'm not seeing anyone saying they're being converted to Remain, the traffic is all one way.
Second choice for shits'n'giggles would be Robert Bork, but he has the same issue as Clarence Darrow.
It's all battered wife thinking.
Remind you of anyone.......
http://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the-paranoid-style-in-american-politics/5/
As we move towards the idea of the Supreme Court becoming some sort of constitutional court there is an argument that the appointment process should have some more independent scrutiny.
Dave is sticking with the tried and tested.
It's like telling a woman in an emotionally abusive relationship that she should stay because her partner loves her really but will make life really difficult for her if she leaves. It's not really tenable in the long-term without serious damage to one side or the other.
I don't think that the same can be said about Britain's membership of the EU - either about Britain or about the EU itself.
Sri Lankan 'witch doctor' claims he used black magic to elect president of the Maldives
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/maldives/12156701/Sri-Lankan-witch-doctor-claims-he-used-black-magic-to-elect-president-of-the-Maldives.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter
There's only a 5.5% probability of a 79 year old dying in that year - life expectancy is 8.6 years and the leading cause of death is cancer......
http://life-span.healthgrove.com/l/80/79
Overweight 79 year old dies in his sleep not long after a Trans Pacific flight from Hong Kong - who are they trying to kid......
http://www.itv.com/news/wales/2016-02-15/poll-shows-growing-support-for-leaving-eu/
That the EU, in or out, is likely to remain the UK's most important market for the foreseeable future. That it is important that we are a part of the rule making process within that market. That to give up our membership of the Council of Ministers, the Commission and the European Parliament simply cannot be in our best interests. There is a real risk that without the UK the EU will become more protectionist, more insular and less successful with adverse consequences for our prosperity.
That, frustrating as it is at times, there are many, many areas where co-operation with our nearest neighbours makes perfect sense and the EU provides a framework for doing that. I might mention pollution, crime, even the mass immigration that the EU is presently enduring as examples of where working together through the framework of the EU makes sense.
That the world is increasingly made of large trading blocs who negotiate with each other on a supra government level. That it is naïve to think we will be able to negotiate the same terms with these trading blocs that the EU can. That the concept of sovereignty in a 19th century sense is simply redundant in the modern interrelated world.
That the EU is far from perfect but it has accepted British exceptionalism to a significant extent already with all the opt outs we have had since Maastricht and that these have been extended (fractionally) even further by Cameron's negotiations. There are reasonable prospects of this continuing and if it doesn't we can leave then.
That the world economy is a particularly fragile state at the present time with a serious risk of a repeat of at least elements of the financial crash. This is not the time to expose the UK to 2 years of uncertainty until the negotiations with the EU are resolved. It will cost inward investment, growth and jobs at the margins.
There are lots of good arguments for Remain, just as there are lots of good arguments for Leave. This is a really complicated and finely balanced decision. It perplexes me that so many can be so sure what the answer is.
Also puts Con + UKIP on 45% which means they could win control of the Welsh Assembly.
Too much 'paranoia' on both sides.
If only someone would approach it along the lines 'On balance, we should X - here are the positives of doing X - and here are the potential downsides' - I'm sure they'd get a willing audience who reject this infantilisation of the electorate 'If you don't do X the bogey man will get you....' (be it 3 million jobs lost or 3 million immigrants arriving)
Vellum update (Telegraph via @suttonnick) https://t.co/DGPAPOFtcn