the scotus battle
the scotus battle
the supreme court, and who is on it, has always been one of my ‘issues’. i suppose that is driven by the fact that i am one of those dreaded social conservatives – unashamedly pro-life and believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.
now with justice souter retiring in June, The One get’s his first crack at nominating someone for the high court. at the risk of being too transparent, THIS is what i have dreaded the most with obama in the wh.
even though souter voted mostly with the libs and replacing him won’t change the balance of the court too much, it is the beginning of the complete take over of scotus and the judiciary in our country by uber liberals.
of course obama is going to pick a liberal jurist to the court. his pick will further enrage and energize conservatives and republicans; just one more poke in the eye that elections matter and have consequences.
there will be a huge fight over his replacement — we all know that. everyone has been blogging about how arlen specter’s defection to the dems gives them close to a filibuster proof majority in the senate — potentially allowing The One’s socialist agenda to sail through. and this seems true on most policies.
but in doing a lot of reading this am on law blogs and listening to my mentor, rush, ironically specter’s defection may give republicans the ability to filibuster judicial nominees at the judiciary committee level, so the nominees never get out of committee. check this out:
“Does Arlen Specter’s defection from R to D strengthen the President’s hand in Congress? Perhaps overall but not on judicial appointments because breaking (the equivalent of) a filibuster in the Senate Judiciary Committee requires the consent of at least one member of the minority. Before today, Specter was likely to be that one Republican. Now what?“
the link in michael dorf’s post is to ‘Congress Matters’, which has the senate judiciary committee rule:
“IV. BRINGING A MATTER TO A VOTE
The Chairman shall entertain a non-debatable motion to bring a matter before the Committee to a vote. If there is objection to bring the matter to a vote without further debate, a roll call vote of the Committee shall be taken, and debate shall be terminated if the motion to bring the matter to a vote without further debate passes with ten votes in the affirmative, one of which must be cast by the minority.”
interesting don’t you think? specter could allow a nominee out of committee if specter was a member of the republican minority, but as part of the majority, he’s just another vote. here are the other republicans: orrin hatch, chuck grassley, jon kyl, jeff sessions, Llndsey graham, john cornyn, and tom coburn.
the weak link is john mccain’s bff, lindsey graham, who was a member of the annoying gang of 14. if lindsey graham stays the course and stops his incessant whining, the republicans may not be able to stop runaway spending, military retrenchment, and an interrogation witch hunt. but they may be able to stop a nominee in committee! arlen specter may have handed us a gift.
how fitting that it was joe biden who arranged it all by convincing specter to switch. thanks, joe!
and just as a reminder, keep an eye out for the scotus nominee from The One to have a tax problem.