Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ruth Bader Ginsburg dead age 87

Question for the Americans present, a couple of the Orange Shitbag's possible nominees are Senators, would they get to vote on their own confirmation or is that a step too far on the self-interest front?
 
Question for the Americans present, a couple of the Orange Shitbag's possible nominees are Senators, would they get to vote on their own confirmation or is that a step too far on the self-interest front?

Looking at what I think was the last time this happened (when Sessions was nominated for AG whilst he was a serving senator), it seems they are shown on the vote but are recorded as "Present" rather than voting one way or another.
 
If the election result is contested by the loser (claiming fraudulent voting or whatever) then is it the case that the Supreme Court decides in the end whether the election result is valid or not?
 
I'd rather assumed they had to already be a judge, but I guess I got that wrong. Or they do, but this administration cares as much about that as they do anything else.

The Constitution apparently doesn't place any limits on who can be on the Supreme Court - they don't have to be a judge, a lawyer, an American citizen, or even an adult.

Obviously it would be a surprise if Trump appointed a Belgian toddler with no legal experience to be the next Supreme Court justice, but they'd still be preferable to Ted Cruz.
 
life appointments to positions of power proving to be a great arrangement once again.

If the Dems don't plan to pack the courts if Biden wins, then you'd think term limits should seriously be considered. Even RBG having to hang onto such an important post until she'd passed away due to the consequences of her stepping down is fairly indicative of how flawed the current system is.
 
If the Dems don't plan to pack the courts if Biden wins, then you'd think term limits should seriously be considered. Even RBG having to hang onto such an important post until she'd passed away due to the consequences of her stepping down is fairly indicative of how flawed the current system is.

Problem is that it likely needs a constitutional amendment to change it and i think that needs a two thirds vote or something like that. It is definately a flaw in their system though.
 
The Constitution apparently doesn't place any limits on who can be on the Supreme Court - they don't have to be a judge, a lawyer, an American citizen, or even an adult.

Obviously it would be a surprise if Trump appointed a Belgian toddler with no legal experience to be the next Supreme Court justice, but they'd still be preferable to Ted Cruz.

IIRC the court havng nine members is a matter of tradition, not law. So a president with a tame senate could theoretically add fourteen goats and the ghost of Elvis Presley if he wanted to.
 
IIRC the court havng nine members is a matter of tradition, not law. So a president with a tame senate could theoretically add fourteen goats and the ghost of Elvis Presley if he wanted to.
It is a matter of law, but plain old law, not Constitutional Law. If the Democrats win House, Senate and President, there's no legal impediment to increasing the number. I doubt they have the guts for it though. Still plenty of "we go high, you go low" sentiment to prevent that sort of shenanigans.
 
Trump tweeting he will replace her “without delay”, others saying he won’t be able to do it in the timeframe. It’s scary as hell this, have been reading what it would mean if he gets to fill that chair.
 
Could have a major impact on the election, as people who were maybe wavering on Trump might think it's worth it to ensure a Republican president picks her replacement (assuming he doesn't manage to push it through before 03 Nov).
Delaying appointment until after the election would help Trump’s chances tbh. Wavering republicans and libertarians who don’t like his character will see this as more important.
If he and McConnell push someone through now then there is no remaining reason for anyone on the right to vote for him.

it does seem to be an important matter for voters

 
That’s very interesting JuanTwoThree . Makes sense, if he understands it he would probably do just that dangle the regressive judge as bait for the votes he needs. But in a scenario (unlikely imo) where he loses and concedes defeat but stays until February (?) he’d then focus fully on trying to install the anti abortion Belgian toddler just as a fuck you legacy.
 
Last edited:
If the election result is contested by the loser (claiming fraudulent voting or whatever) then is it the case that the Supreme Court decides in the end whether the election result is valid or not?
just confirming that a sense of looming dread is generally the correct reaction to things.
E6307C92-4282-43AA-91A7-64C93B20F09D.jpeg
 
Back
Top Bottom