I believe his nomination is now on a fast track ,which will increase the likelihood of the nuclear option being used.

Since SCOTUS is deadlocked at 4-4 in most cases ,it is up to the San Francisco 9th Circus Court of Appeals to decided if the U.S. District Court Judge James Robart's TRO on the herr Donald's EO, restricting immigration from seven countries,will stand . In other words ,it is not likely that the TRO will be reversed on appeal . I could be wrong about that ,but the 9th has a history .

Sending the case to SCOTUS now would likely be a 4-4 decision which would mean the Appeals Court's decision would stand . Although I think it is perfectly within the executive powers to make the call ;unless Gorsuch is swiftly confirmed ,it appears that the courts will again get away with violating their constitutional powers .

Justice Dept. appeals judge's block on Trump's extreme vetting order - POLITICO (http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-appeal-immigration-travel-ban-234655)

Update the 9th Circus denied the government's motion for an emergency stay pending it's request for additional documents .

Could the Donald have moved to fast with his EO's? As to the SCOTUS nomination, or any other of Trump's picks, they deserve scrutiny as the Senate's advise and consent responsibility. Should they be rubber stamped for expediency? Repubs might but Dems should not.

Respect the process, even if the impulsive gets impatient.

Should they be rubber stamped for expediency? Repubs might but Dems should not.

Respect the process, even if the impulsive gets impatient.




bwaaaaaaahaaaaaahaaaaaaa!!!
The Dems crossed that bridge a long time ago .


And yes herr Donald moved too fast ,so the implementation was sloppy and caused unnecessary grief . However ,the policy he announced was within his constitutional authority .

Don't worry Tom, I am sure dems will slow him down and take apart all the parts of anything Trump does, :D! As well they should with such an egotistical loud mouth BULLY, with no governing experience... foreign or domestic!

Lol! It's all just show biz until the congress actually writes legislature.

it is important to note that the nuclear option is not the only way Senate majorities can overcome minority obstruction. The current Standing Rules of the Senate empower a majority of the institution’s members to overcome a filibuster and confirm a nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court without utilizing the nuclear option and, therefore, without jeopardizing the legislative filibuster.Specifically, minority obstruction may be curtailed by strictly enforcing Rule XIX (the two-speech rule) on the Senate floor.
“Rule XIX: Debate,” Standing Rules of the Senate (Washington: Government Printing Office, 2007), 14.


Doing so simply requires the Senate to remain in the same legislative day until the filibustering members have exhausted their ability to speak on the nominee in question. This is the point at which those members who are committed to blocking that nominee’s confirmation have given the two floor speeches allotted to them under Rule XIX. Once this point is reached, the Presiding Officer may put the question (call for a vote) on confirmation. The support of a simple majority of the members present and voting is sufficient for confirmation.
A Rules-Based Strategy for Overcoming Minority Obstruction of a Supreme Court Nomination | The Heritage Foundation (http://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/rules-based-strategy-overcoming-minority-obstruction-supreme-court?_ga=1.180569063.1741155618.1485030952)

Using the two-speech rule to confirm Trump’s Supreme Court pick is straightforward.
First, the Senate would proceed to consider the nomination. The Republican majority would then keep the Senate in the same legislative day and would strictly enforce the two-speech rule on any filibustering senators.
While Democrats could make procedural motions in protest, doing so in almost all cases would terminate the filibustering senator’s speech, thus hastening the moment at which the minority would have exhausted its ability to delay confirmation by filibustering via debate.
Strictly enforcing the two-speech rule is likely to break the filibuster before every Democrat uses the maximum number of speeches allotted under the rules. This is because continuing to filibuster in this context imposes significant costs on rank-and-file Democrats. To have even the chance of success requires each Democrat to hold the Senate floor for a prolonged period in an effort to wait out the Republicans.
The only way for them to prevail in the parliamentary showdown is for Republicans to relent and cease their efforts to overcome the filibuster.
http://dailysignal.com/2017/01/31/how-senate-republicans-can-break-a-supreme-court-filibuster/​