• Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    Isn’t the argument that a younger replacement would be fast tracked now, while the Dems had the whitehouse and the senate?

    The left obviously doesn’t want to leave a vacant seat for Trump. The point is to lock the seat down even harder.

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 days ago

      Lol, you think the republicans would seat a new justice after Biden lost the election? They only ever do that for their own party

      • Jesus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        11 days ago

        What is up with the reading comprehension in this thread?

        The Democrats still control Supreme Court appointments until January.

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 days ago

        They don’t have a say in the matter in the current senate, it’s all about the DINOs.

    • Eldritch@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 days ago

      That worked out so well getting us Justice Gorsuch. When Ruth Bader Ginsburg died. Have things gotten significantly better since then? Or worse?

    • Billiam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      11 days ago

      Different circumstances, same result.

      Previously McConnell prevented the Senate from voting on Obama’s nomination for months before the election.

      In this case, Biden could nominate someone, and Schumer would undoubtedly call a vote ASAP, but then you’d risk the vote failing because of Manchin and Sinema. They’ve already publicly betrayed the Democratic party and they’re both on their way out; there’s nothing for them to gain by playing ball with a SCOTUS nominee.

      The result would be exactly as before: Trump would come into office and get a SCOTUS pick right away, the only thing that might be different is whether McConnell or Scott gets to submit the pick. Hell, he might get to do it anyway if Alito and/or Thomas retire, so why give up another seat?

      • Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 days ago

        They’d need to do what they do before bringing a bill to the floor. Make sure that they have the votes ahead of time.

        If you get one of those two people bought in on a particular justice candidate, then you could tell the current sitting Justice “it’s safe,” and you could fast-track the new person.

        That said, there is still risk of someone having a change of heart at the last minute.

        • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          11 days ago

          Yeah, I don’t get why people think they’d just YOLO this and find out how Manchinema would vote on the senate floor. If one of them isn’t locked in, then definitely don’t start it, but maybe Sinema, for all her mercenary ways, might think abortion actually did matter and a 7-2 court is just dumb.

    • Pika@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 days ago

      aren’t they just going to have the same issue as last time, where the appointment will be stalled till he takes office then suddenly all the resistance disappears and they can send it through immediately?

      • Zaktor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 days ago

        The Democrats control the Senate. The Republicans don’t have an option to stall until January. It’s all about whether the DINOs want a 7-2 court.