Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #1

    Feb 5, 2017, 04:24 AM
    How long will it take to confirm Gorsuch to SCOTUS ?
    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
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #2

    Feb 5, 2017, 05:12 AM
    Update the 9th Circus denied the government's motion for an emergency stay pending it's request for additional documents .
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #3

    Feb 5, 2017, 06:09 AM
    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.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #4

    Feb 5, 2017, 07:25 AM
    1. 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 .
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,325, Reputation: 10855
    Expert
     
    #5

    Feb 5, 2017, 08:39 AM
    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.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,742, Reputation: 346
    Ultra Member
     
    #6

    Feb 5, 2017, 02:48 PM
    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

    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/ho...buster/​

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Meet your new Associate Justice of the Supreme Court ,Neil Gorsuch [ 40 Answers ]

Liberals & Lawsuits -- Supreme Court | National Review http://rightoncrime.com/2013/11/judge-neil-gorsuch-on-overcriminalization/

SCOTUS decisions [ 158 Answers ]

Two unanimous decisions today, SCOTUS ruled Obama's LRB appointments were unconstitutional. Apparently they all agreed Congress determines when it is in recess. On another front, they unanimously agreed that Massachusetts'' 35 foot buffer zone around abortion clinics was unconstitutional....

Big week for SCOTUS [ 181 Answers ]

This week SCOTUS will make rulings on 4 cases that could be historic. Fisher v. University of Texas The petitioners argued that racial preferences in admissions to the University of Texas violate the 14 Amendment of the Constitution .The court could make a narrow ruling ,or it could overturn...

Acorn and SCOTUS [ 29 Answers ]

What's this I'm hearing? Did the SCOTUS really decline to force the AG of Ohio to verify 200,000 new suspect voter registrations? Most were submitted by ACORN, it seems. Have we reached the place when a partisan AG and Governor can support voter fraud in order for their guy to be elected, and NOT...

More SCOTUS decisions [ 24 Answers ]

Chief Justice Roberts said, "The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race." Wasn't that refreshing? Clarence Thomas added, "What was wrong in 1954 cannot be right today... The plans before us base school assignment decisions on students'...


View more questions Search