|
His death is probably gonna save public unions, too. I'm assuming it'll be a 4-4 tie now, with the lower court ruling being in favor of people forced into paying dues.
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:55 |
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Can the Senate really block Obama's appointee to the point where it becomes irrelevant due to the next elections? They can run out the clock, yes. The spokesman for the head of Senate Judiciary already said there's a "less than zero percent chance" that Obama nominates his replacement.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Joe Biden has come out against nominating a Supreme Court Justice in an election year, urges Obama to follow "historical precedent:" http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4581754/biden-senate-hearings-scotus-vacancy-election-year
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 19:55
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:uh why is anyone assuming arkane is being honest, it's a clip from the end of june 1992 oh dear god, the callous dishonesty of posting snark! regardless, it is funny the fake outrage that is being bandied about when the exact same thing would happen/has happened if the parties were switched.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I'm pretty sure the Democrats have never outright rejected even the possibility of having nominations out of hand. In the video, Biden says that the Senate committee should not even consider anyone nominated until after the election is over. which is practically the same as the current meme from the GOP side that Obama shouldn't bother nominating anyone and weasel, I didn't argue it was right. I was arguing against partisans treating two similar situations completely differently depending on who was in power. whether Its Biden in 92 or, to a lesser extent, Reid/Obama in 07/08, both parties are obnoxiously partisan, and seemingly at their worst when it comes to judicial nominations.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2016 21:33
|
|