Bragging about that is likely going to do more harm than good to a candidate's standing with most of the US electorate.

Surprised Trump didn't chip in with 'Donde esta el banol?'.

They can in theory filibuster for a year as the Dems don't have a supermajority. It would be quite unprecedented. I read a Reagan quote this morning that essentially says it is a constitutional duty to fill such an appointment as soon as possible.

We will see, not sure Obama will see it this way and will put forward someone who could be agreed upon.

Are they then going to filibuster for another four years when Hillary/Bernie is the next President?

Not necessary. They'll just stall and vote against every nominee for the job.

The right-wing opinion press is already beating this drum, pointing out that a failure to appoint a replacement in a timely manner as a result of political conflicts happened back in the 1840s. (And you know how they are -- if it happened during antebellum days, then it must be good!)

You can bet that no one will be confirmed prior to election day, and the delays will go into 2017 if a Republican wins the election.

I think Bernie wants to get things done, I presume you meant the delays will go on if Hillary wins.

A moment of silence in honour of Antonin Scalia, please. His death will certainly focus the minds of everyone as to the importance of this election.

The dems are already using this as a fundraiser. As soon as the evangelicals hear that Obama's choice argued against the DOMA before the Supremes, they will be reaching deep into their pockets as well.

Hopefully this will inspire many who would otherwise stay at home during the election to get out and vote. Sadly, I doubt the young democrats will be as motivated as the republicans in this regard.

Further to the question of Obama making a recess appointment to the Supreme Court of someone (One name floated frequently was Sri Srinivasan, who The New Yorker described as "the nominee in waiting." He was appointed to the Court of Appeals by 97 - 1) while the Senate is in recess, which it now is.

There is a detailed discussion of the ramifications of such an attempt here, which is worthy of review in any future discussion of this issue:

Is a recess appointment to the Court an option? (UPDATED) : SCOTUSblog

Perhaps Obama needs to read it, and some of the talking heads?

If by "moment of silence" you mean putting on a red dress and dancing on his grave, I'm in.

Not sure about the electorate as a whole, but certainly those that vote in the GOP primary.

How does this affect the stuff already on the calendar? The SCOTUS is supposed to hear arguments on the Texas abortion restrictions case in a few weeks.

Like this?