|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1,478
|
Legend [19901]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 16717
Joined: 11/28/00
|
Associate Justice of the SCOTUS, Amy Coney Barrett
Oct 26, 2020, 8:19 PM
|
|
Confirmed by Senate. Will be given oath of office by Thomas later tonight.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [34486]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 13513
Joined: 8/30/19
|
Congratulations Amy! You go girl!
Oct 26, 2020, 8:20 PM
|
|
Woooooo!!!
I'm sure glad that other old chick is gone!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [8982]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9780
Joined: 4/27/13
|
Re: Associate Justice of the SCOTUS, Amy Coney Barrett
Oct 26, 2020, 8:21 PM
|
|
how do we go bout kicking roberts down a notch, who makes him Chief?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
He was nominated and confirmed as Chief Justice
Oct 27, 2020, 7:46 AM
|
|
The next Chief Justice will replace Roberts when he retires, dies, or (low probability) is impeached/removed.
The main difference between the Chief Justice and other justices is administrative. He technically presides over sessions. He doesn't have more judicial power...his vote counts the same as the others'.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [56062]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 31634
Joined: 8/27/02
|
Congrats Amy Conan O’Brien!
Oct 26, 2020, 8:23 PM
|
|
So glad we finally got a Catholic on the bench.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [83625]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63724
Joined: 12/31/06
|
Yes!!!
Oct 26, 2020, 8:26 PM
|
|
We can overturn the election now!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [49163]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 27593
Joined: 8/10/02
|
I don't have a problem with her, just the process.
Oct 26, 2020, 8:28 PM
|
|
And how McConnell has engineered such a number of conservative judges. I don't mind the other conservative judges either. But the way it was done bothers me. I do understand he had the rules on his side; he could do it, so he did. That's politics, and McConnell played his cards well. Funny part is somehow Trump learned this was a big deal, and went along, though I doubt he seriously cared about the judges either way, so long as there was a benefit in it for him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Beyond her not answering questions during confirmation...
Oct 26, 2020, 10:54 PM
|
|
the fact she seems to not have a problem with this "process" is a big red flag. The fact it was rushed while the election has already started would, I think, worry a non-partisan, fair-minded, and considerate judge. The fact she didn't pretty much confirms who she is and what she stands for.
Court rebalancing is probably now on the table if Dems win big on Nov. 3rd which is something I don't want to see, but is probably going to have to happen now. Thanks Republicans.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I don't get the sense that it was rushed....
Oct 27, 2020, 7:49 AM
|
|
I don't know why all confirmations can't be done as efficiently. They had a fair hearing, and then after the hearing, they voted. Nothing wrong with that. I'd go with the converse, that the normal confirmation process is too slow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
Context matters.
Oct 27, 2020, 2:53 PM
|
|
People have already started voting in the election, and instead of focusing on COVID relief, they focused on pushing through the confirmation. There was no reason they couldn't wait until after the election to do the confirmation. There was no reason not to prioritize covid relief before her confirmation. They chose to rush the confirmation because of what they think is going to happen in the election and go against the will of the people in order to place sandbags against the rising prospects of a democrat-led legislature. Mitch McConnell admitted as much when he said,
“A lot of what we’ve done over the last four years will be undone sooner or later by the next election,” the majority leader said on the Senate floor. “They won’t be able to do much about this for a long time to come.”
It doesn't help Barrett's image and certainly at least throws her judgement into question when she seemed to have no issues with the process.
Your point is actually fine if this context didn't exist but it does and you should understand it.
And unfortunately, because this happened, the dems are building up the courage to do something more drastic than I'd like in order to balance things back out and it sucks because all of this could have been avoided if the Republicans simply were content with their small conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3050]
TigerPulse: 58%
Posts: 3543
Joined: 11/24/17
|
Re: Context matters.
Oct 27, 2020, 3:32 PM
|
|
Do you really believe that given the same set of circumstances, the dems would not have filled the seat? You think they would have passed up the chance to replace a conservative justice with one more of their liking? The repubs rushed the confirmation for the same reasons the dems, given the chance would have done so. They want to shape the court for years. Dems would like to do the same thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
and it's wrong/bad for the country if they did it too.
Oct 27, 2020, 3:50 PM
|
|
but the reality is it's the Republicans that have created a situation where the court can not be assumed to be non-partisan and impartial by their unprecedented behavior, and unfortunately, it's probably going to lead to an opposite and equal reaction by the Dems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3050]
TigerPulse: 58%
Posts: 3543
Joined: 11/24/17
|
Re: and it's wrong/bad for the country if they did it too.
Oct 27, 2020, 5:29 PM
|
|
Do you ever wonder why liberals never consider liberal-leaning justices to be bias or non-partisan?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
It's more about the makeup of the court overall
Oct 27, 2020, 7:11 PM
|
|
Can you give a good non-partisan reason why they rushed the confirmation when they could have done it after the election?
Can you give a good non-partisan reason why they didn't concentrate on passing Covid relief instead of rushing through Barrett?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3050]
TigerPulse: 58%
Posts: 3543
Joined: 11/24/17
|
Re: It's more about the makeup of the court overall
Oct 27, 2020, 7:18 PM
|
|
Rushing through the Barrett confirmation was complete partisainship by the Repubs. I'm just not going to pretend the Dems would not have done the exact thing. The answer to your questions are obvious. Why not after the election? It was an immediate opportunity to shape the court for years - an opportunity that might not exist after the election. It's beyond me why people pretend politics aren't political, or partisian, or full of hypocrisy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
None of that means we have to like or accept it
Oct 27, 2020, 7:41 PM
|
|
It's beyond me why people think that because politics has examples of partisan and hypocritcal acts that we should just accept them and move on.
It's why I'm also going to be upset when the dems change the makeup of the courts to balance out what the republicans did. It's probably necessary, but totally avoidable had the republicans been content with their small conservative majority on the Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3050]
TigerPulse: 58%
Posts: 3543
Joined: 11/24/17
|
Re: None of that means we have to like or accept it
Oct 27, 2020, 8:16 PM
|
|
So what's your alternative? Vote for the other party (who would do the same thing given the chance?). Why should be Repubs be content with a small majority? I'm glad they've reshaped the court. Nothing in the Trump administration was as big as replacing Ginsburg with someone referred to as the female Scalia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [18018]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30152
Joined: 9/9/06
|
I've stated the alternative already....
Oct 27, 2020, 8:54 PM
|
|
and I've stated why the Republicans should have been content with the small majority. We'll see what happens next.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46816]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30720
Joined: 8/11/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [111519]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 73737
Joined: 9/10/03
|
Re: Associate Justice of the SCOTUS, Amy Coney Barrett
Oct 26, 2020, 8:37 PM
|
|
finally, we can kick all those sick people out of the insurance pool and lower my premiums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [24747]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 42467
Joined: 7/31/10
|
...and add police substations at the hospital emergency room***
Oct 27, 2020, 8:25 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 20
| visibility 1,478
|
|
|
50
