Graham on Filling SCOTUS Seat: After Kavanaugh, the Rules Changed

It’s so refreshing that this is making Covid old news. We won’t hear much about flu #2 anymore and it’ll be great.

quote:

---

what rule changed?

---

Common decency was thrown the frick out of the window.

The rules haven't changed though. He should be careful not to lose the narrative. Filing this vacancy is normal and has plenty of historical precedent.

LINK

quote:

---

History Is on the Side of Republicans Filling a Supreme Court Vacancy in 2020

---

quote:

---

History supports Republicans filling the seat. Doing so would not be in any way inconsistent with Senate Republicans’ holding open the seat vacated by Justice Antonin Scalia in 2016. The reason is simple, and was explained by Mitch McConnell at the time. Historically, throughout American history, when their party controls the Senate, presidents get to fill Supreme Court vacancies at any time — even in a presidential election year, even in a lame-duck session after the election, even after defeat.

---

quote:

---

Historically, when the opposite party controls the Senate, the Senate gets to block Supreme Court nominees sent up in a presidential election year, and hold the seat open for the winner. Both of those precedents are settled by experience as old as the republic. Republicans should not create a brand-new precedent to deviate from them.

---

quote:

---

Republicans should not discard the rule of law or traditional norms to achieve their ends, but a Ginsburg vacancy, if one happens, would require Republicans only to act within the law and in accord with tradition. Woe to their future if they shrink from that

---

quote:

---

The rules haven't changed though. He should be careful not to lose the narrative. Filing this vacancy is normal and has plenty of historical precedent.

---

I think you're taking him too literally. He's talking about the rules of common decency and normal procedure, not the rules of the US Constitution

quote:

---

I think you're taking him too literally. He's talking about the rules of common decency and normal procedure, not the rules of the US Constitution

---

I agree with him there but he needs to be out front pointing out that filing the vacancy is well within the Constitutional powers granted to the Senate and President and that historical precedent is on their side.

The "McConnell rule" is that they won't confirm when these 2 things are true:

1. It's an election year

AND

2. The Presidency and the Senate are not in the hands of the same party.



part 2 is not true, therefore the 'rule' isn't even in play

I think the only thing he is referring to is that while it is understandable that the opposition party is going to oppose the nominee once they make it out of committee they are typically voted in by both parties.

Kavanaugh was 50-48
Gorsuch was 54-45
Kagan was 63-37
Sotomayor was 68-31

The Republicans never lock arms together to go against a person as a party.

We fully expect this voted to be at the top end 53-47,but I bet you will see 50-47 with Collins, Murkowski and Romney abstaining.

Good. frick the dems and what they did to Kavanaugh and his family. You made your bed now lay in it, trash.

Hopefully it is the rule that says the democrats get to confirm nothing but lockstep leftists while the Republicans get 50-50% constitutionals and fakers.