Scalia Dead

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by icenine

If I was Obama I would a pick a Latino with moderate to conservative leanings, someone appointed by a Republican before...

Where's Earl Warren when you need him?

Regards,

D-Ray

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by icenine

Can the court hear cases with less than 9 members?

It appears so.

'If Republicans block Obama’s Supreme Court nomination, he wins anyway'

"After Justice Antonin Scalia’s death Saturday at 79, the Supreme Court is now evenly divided between four liberal justices and four conservatives, even with Anthony Kennedy’s occasional swings. What a moment for Scalia to depart: The court faces a wild array of closely divided decisions. It is an election year. And President Obama has stacked the lower circuit courts with Democrats. Obama has been chewing on his legacy for months. Fate has handed him the opportunity of any presidency — to swing the balance of the Supreme Court from conservative to liberal." WaPo

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...mepage%2Fstory

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by icenine

Can the court hear cases with less than 9 members?

Yes. Quorum is six. Someone was saying though that cases decided with less than nine can be reconsidered later. Ties count as upholding the lower court.

[Rajoo]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Yes. Quorum is six. Someone was saying though that cases decided with less than nine can be reconsidered later. Ties count as upholding the lower court.

I don't see a quorum mentioned here. From what I gather, all justices must hear every case that is accepted and vote on it. Also from what I have read, when there is a tie (one seat is vacant), the lower court order stays. So I guess this means that the case can be heard again by the full court.

Not trying to challenge you, just entering into a discussion. I believe that this is a much bigger issue for now than the upcoming election.

http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...rces/supreme-1

[BlueStreak]

Well, aint that a bitch?

Oh, Geez my bad!

RIP Assho...........

Gaw! There I go again!

Oh, well.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by BeamOn

I don't see a quorum mentioned here. From what I gather, all justices must hear every case that is accepted and vote on it. Also from what I have read, when there is a tie (one seat is vacant), the lower court order stays. So I guess this means that the case can be heard again by the full court.

Not trying to challenge you, just entering into a discussion. I believe that this is a much bigger issue for now than the upcoming election.

http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federa...rces/supreme-1

Challenge away, I don't mind disagreement and I'm perfectly capable of being wrong. I only get prickly when people are insulting pricks about it....

Someone elsewhere asserted there was a 2/3 = quorum rule, that's all I know about that. We are agreed in any case that 8 can rule, and if they tie nothing is overturned.

[Rajoo]

Here is a good comment by a Charlie Cook, nonpartisan political analyst.

“Maybe a Supreme Court vacancy will remind people that presidential elections are not circuses — they really are important,” said Charlie Cook, a nonpartisan political analyst. “The stakes just went up, and now everyone knows it.”

A great opportunity for President Obama to nominate someone who regardless of whether the person gets confirmed can cause significant political interference in the upcoming elections. In other words a 'screw you McConnell and the horse you rode in'.

Here is a good Lefty Times article on this.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...213-story.html

Another good point this article brings up is the status of the case regarding Obama's EO on 5 million illegals living in the US. What becomes of this case now?

[68custom]

personally I think the common dude knows very little about the SCOTUS or any of the other three branches. some one may be able to stir up controversy over the needs to appoint a new judge, but I do not see the Trump crowd being overly concerned. They just want the wall.
here is info on a interesting survey, though a bit old..
http://www.annenbergpublicpolicycent...-survey-finds/

[djv8ga]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I think that most of the senators in his own party would reject him.

Regards,

D-Ray

So they would treat one of their own the same way as they will treat Obama's nominee?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by icenine

If I was Obama I would a pick a Latino with moderate to conservative leanings, someone appointed by a Republican before...

You mean someone who would vote with Roberts, Alito and Thomas most of the time?