Anian

The Republicans are then stuck with either someone more liberal than they would like or to demonstrate how they are very obstructionist and lose face in the next election. My bet is on the latter because it is more short-term and their chances for a right-wing president are not great anyway.

FlaviusAetius

They can't really win then as you see it. Either they cave on allowing the liberals to have a majority on SCOTUS, which will inevitably rubber stamp every left-wing piece of legislation on the books and every executive order coming out of the Obama/Clinton/Sanders White House (alternatively striking down all important future conservative legislation), or they are obstructionists, which, by the way, is what an opposition party is supposed to be in the real world.

They could win on this issue if they educate the voting public that what is important is to let the next President - whoever he or she is - make that nomination after the people have spoken on November 8 and determined the path they want the country to take.

To aid in the process, they have to trot out the video of Chuckie Schumer stating so eloquently, in the last year of W's presidency, that very point. 'We Should Not Confirm Any Bush Nominee To The Supreme Court' because he didn't want Alito and Roberts to have any more allies on the Court.

RoadWarriorFromLP

The selection of Supreme Court justices is a constitutional requirement. The Republicans are essentially saying that the Senate should abdicate for a year instead of doing its job and advising on the nominations that the president is required to make.

Funny how the constitution is completely forgotten about when the GOP has an agenda. The entire country is supposed to put itself on pause so that the Republicans can have yet another tantrum.

Giantaxe

Does the current (until Scalia's death) conservative majority "rubber stamp every right-wing piece of legislation on the books and every executive order coming out of the Bush/Bush/Bush White House (alternatively striking down all important future liberal legislation)?

He didn't say that; there was an important caveat. He also never suggested that candidates not be nominated/never get a hearing.

RoadWarriorFromLP

It's really difficult to take American conservatives seriously when they can't get basic facts straight or quote people properly.

I would probably vote Labour in the UK, but surely the Tories aren't this bad.

Anian

They have been "winning" for a long time now, the country won't implode if the other side gains a one-seat majority for a change.

No, the public have already elected a president to make these kinds of decisions. Delaying it an unprecedented length of time in case a Republican gets elected, under the pretense that the public is choosing, is a ruse and no one is falling for it.

RoadWarriorFromLP

Well, the Republicans absolutely love the idea. Then again, they're convinced that it is impossible to have a duly elected Democratic president.

Giantaxe

It's fascinating how so many Republicans claim to want to protect the constitution and rail against Obama's "abuses" of it, then conveniently try to ignore it when it suits them.

sir_eccles

I think there is some evidence that when presidents have tried to stack the deck with super liberal or conservative judges it has bitten them on the ass. After all they have no control over them (I think this separation must be some sort of checks and balances thing between the three branches of government, I wonder if the founding fathers thought to put anything in the constitution about it?).

As for the opposition's duty to be obstructionists what utter hokum.

RoadWarriorFromLP

"Advise and consent" does not require them to grant consent. They can advise against nominees if they wish, and they don't have to be particularly nice about it.

But refusing to even participate in the advise and consent process would be a pretty blatant violation of Article 2, which mandates that the president nominate justices and that the senate participates. Abdication of their duties is not an option, and there is no one else to whom it can be delegated.

scrubbedexpat099

Obama could always put forward someone acceptable to the majority of the Senate.

RoadWarriorFromLP

Er, the Republicans are saying that he shouldn't nominate anyone.

CelticRover

Quite a twist on the traditional concept of being the Loyal Opposition.

CelticRover

I await Mr Trump's ongoing comments toward Jeb bringing his big brother onboard. � ����

Bush brothers band together against Trump - UPI.com

zargof

So I see they're already starting the conspiracy theories over Scalia's death.

Antonin Scalia death: Questions asked as US fights over successor - BBC News

I think the most likely explanation is they found something embarrassing on him when he died (like a Bernie 2016 t-shirt) and they want to protect his family.