The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
RI....eh, Scalia died.
Sterica
YesRegistered User, Moderator mod
YesRegistered User, Moderator mod
Apparently he passed away in his sleep.
Details are kinda up in the air. It's probably best that the thread isn't just beating up on the dude and focusing on the SCOTUS post-Scalia.
Details are kinda up in the air. It's probably best that the thread isn't just beating up on the dude and focusing on the SCOTUS post-Scalia.
Sterica on
+2
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
but they're listening to every word I say
"Messily".
poorly, would be my guess
but in the last 50 years I don't see a single one that lasted more than 3 months
My opinion is this: Ruth Bader Ginsburg apparently thought of him as a friend, and is probably mourning. And if you ever disagree with RBG, you should step back and reconsider things.
The problem with a lot of rules and procedures in the Senate is the majority makes them, and can basically do whatever they want. There's a whole lot of "we won't if you don't..." around the idea that one side won't be in power forever, and thus they don't want to be screwed down the road. For instance, "killing the filibuster", aka "the nuclear option" is great for the Dems while they're in power, but that might not be forever. That's why "nuclear", as it's such a step, you better be sure it's a permanent win, otherwise we shall all go together when we go.
Republicans control both houses of Congress, they don't really need to filibuster anything.
Fair point about our current situation though, Geebs.
But I'm not really celebrating this person's death.
I'm celebrating the retirement of one of the worst justices we've ever had on the court.
That the two events are frequently synonymous is a problem with the Constitution, not me.
I feel pretty good mourning the passing of one of the greatest intellects ever to sit on the bench while simultaneously celebrating the fact that he won't be there to utilize said intellect to fuck over the country.
some of them are already making noise about not letting Obama appoint a new Justice. it's kind of scattered, now, but that's going to get louder as the news spreads
and
there's a GOP debate tonight.
The sane ones? No.
Otherwise, he's still a brown commie mooslim, isn't he?
I mean I'm talking about the Branch Dildonian wing of the party here. The ones Y'all Qaeda would vote for.
House has nothing to do with SC nominations
The process is (I believe) Judicial committee approval -> general vote
I don't think a supreme court nominee has ever been filibustered (but they have been voted down) but hey, we can always set fun precedents!
The US Supreme Court is one of three branches of the federal government. The Legislative (House of Representatives and Senate) create laws, the Executive (Presidency) executes the laws, and the Judicial (Supreme Court) decides if laws are constitutional. The Supreme Court is comprised of nine justices (one Chief and eight Associate). When deciding on a case, majority rules. For example, if 5 justice vote a law is constitutional and 4 do not, the law is ruled constitutional.
Yesterday, the Court could be roughly broken into two factions: the liberal wing (Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Breyer, and Kagan) and the conservative wing (Scalia, Alito, Roberts, Thomas) with Justice Kennedy often acting as a swing vote. The death of Justice Scalia disrupts this balance of power, both in terms of important rulings coming up, but also in terms of who replaces him.
Supreme Court justices are appointed by the President, but must be confirmed by the Senate. Currently, the Senate is controlled by the Republican Party, and so any nomination President Obama makes has a tough road to make it through. The Senate could straight up vote to reject any Obama nomination. That being said, if the Republicans in the Senate hope to stall until the 2016 elections, there is a year between now and when the next President will be sworn in.
Essentially, this election may have just turned into not just electing the next President and determining who controls the Senate (10 Democratic seats vs 24 Republican seats), but also who gets to appoint the next Supreme Court Justice.
It's an election year. There's a ton of them that would want to wear "I stopped Obama from appointing another liberal judge to the Supreme Court" as a badge of honor in November. I would imagine it's a much higher number than the few in contested districts that would be worried about being challenged over it.
the world isn't ready for justice Deez Nuts
and it seems the next supreme court justice is... SSJ4 Goku?
I have already said to not make the thread a Scalia is Dead Party, which is about as much respect as I care to give him.
excuse me ssj4 is non-canon
At least he died in his sleep, there's worse ways to go.
ain't no one got to do nothing, ever
Justice Weed Lord Vegeta.
canonicity isn't specified as a requirement to hold the office unfortunately
here we go
it's gonna get talked about somewhere in here, why not make a thread?
The new SCOTUS is an area of discussion that's going to be more fruitful.
He couldn't have picked a more inconvenient time to die.