0
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Separation of powers? frick that. Judiciary is supreme.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:46 pm to udtiger
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:46 pm to udtiger
What would be awesome is if Blanche used the Special Counsel Regs and appointed one to sit in Seattle with broadly defined jurisdiction over the western district of Washington, just as the reg requires.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:47 pm to JimEverett
quote:
28 U.S. Code § 541
Nice pull.
So, SFP...comment?
It's a statute after all. And since these judges are naming these people as US Attorneys it would certainly seem to apply.
But I guess only some statutes are unconstitutional.
C'mon... give the the "strawman." You know you want to.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:47 pm to Timeoday
quote:
I would pay big money to see a marine unit remove 5 - 8 rogue judges on any given day, those judges to be never heard from again
It moved
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:47 pm to udtiger
Maybe if the Executive branch showed less contempt for the Legislative branch and actually had its picks confirmed by the Senate, maybe the Judicial branch wouldn't be put in a position to make appointments.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:48 pm to udtiger
quote:
It's a statute after all. And since these judges are naming these people as US Attorneys it would certainly seem to apply.
But I guess only some statutes are unconstitutional.
When did you lose the ability to read?
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:48 pm to udtiger
quote:
This is an absolute lie.
His nominees are bottled up in the Judiciary Committee because Grassley is honoring blue slips. What's more is that Thune won't recess the Senate so he can fill.the slots with recess appointments
Yes, I'm sorry, I shouldn't have just copied a media explanation. For whatever reason, Trump's nominees aren't getting Senate approval. The practical, legal consequence is that by statute the USA's are appointed by the District Judges.
It's going to be an interesting Supreme Court decision whether or not the Executive can be saddled with employees it doesn't want.
It IS a ridiculous situation. As with so many other things, why hasn't the Republican controlled Congress at least attempted to change the law?
Similarly, why didn't they try to increase the number of federal judges significantly? Partisanship aside, we need more judges!
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:49 pm to ATrillionaire
quote:
Maybe if the Executive branch showed less contempt for the Legislative branch and actually had its picks confirmed by the Senate
So the President is not entitled to his nominees? Only those approved by the senators of that state...even if a majority of Senators would confirm if given the chance to vote for them?
Find where blue slips are in the Constitution. And don't give me each chamber can have their own rules because they are not a rule, they are a "tradition".
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:53 pm to udtiger
quote:
So the President is not entitled to his nominees?
He's entitled to nominate candidates. The Senate confirms them.
Obama nominated a Supreme Court Justice. How did that turn out?
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:55 pm to ATrillionaire
quote:
Obama nominated a Supreme Court Justice. How did that turn out?
Did the other 8 justices appoint a replacement that Trump was stuck with?
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:55 pm to ATrillionaire
quote:
He's entitled to nominate candidates. The Senate confirms them.
Obama nominated a Supreme Court Justice. How did that turn out?
Come on man - Don't be this stupid.
Think
What is the difference between a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and a U.S. Attorney?
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:56 pm to udtiger
quote:
So the President is not entitled to his nominees?
He's only entitled to the ones the Senate approves. Separation of powers, and all that.
quote:
Only those approved by the senators of that state...even if a majority of Senators would confirm if given the chance to vote for them?
That's the Senate's rules and how they engage in the legislative process, which the President CERTAINLY has no power over.
quote:
Find where blue slips are in the Constitution. And don't give me each chamber can have their own rules because they are not a rule, they are a "tradition".
You ask for an answer and then exclude the answer
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:57 pm to JimEverett
quote:
What is the difference between a justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and a U.S. Attorney?
That's not the argument. The argument is what's different abt the confirmation process. Not much.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 3:58 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
You ask for an answer and then exclude the answer
Because
It
Is
Not
A
Senate
Rule
Keep up.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:01 pm to udtiger
quote:
Because
It
Is
Not
A
Senate
Rule
Keep up
What power does Trump have to tell the Senate how to operate its primary Constitutional functions?
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:05 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
It IS a ridiculous situation. As with so many other things, why hasn't the Republican controlled Congress at least attempted to change the law?
Stripping themselves of power is right up their alley.
Some tools, you don't give up.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:09 pm to udtiger
quote:The part where the Senate is able to make up their own rules to conduct their business.
Find where blue slips are in the Constitution.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:15 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
The part where the Senate is able to make up their own rules to conduct their business.
Not a Senate rule
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:24 pm to udtiger
quote:
Not a Senate rule
What's the difference if it's a formal Senate rule or not? If the members abide by it, then it's a rule.
Committees adopt their own rules all the time that may not be included in Senate standing rules.
Who's gonna tell them that they can't?
This post was edited on 10/1/26 at 4:35 pm
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:31 pm to udtiger
Need to overturn Marbury v Madison.
Rule by judicial fiat is a plague on our people.
Rule by judicial fiat is a plague on our people.
Posted on 10/1/26 at 4:32 pm to udtiger
quote:
Not a Senate rule
I'm with you on this. Grassley has even bitched about Dems abusing it for partisan purposes.
Wonder why Trump didn't use his political muscle for this.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News