No Senate hearings for SC nominee? THAT would be interesting!

We will be seeing Democrat attempts to delay the Senate hearings. Can they be bypassed completely? See this article about Schumer’s threat to invoke the “2-hour rule”.

CBS News

The move was intended to retaliate against Republicans, who have agreed to vote on confirming President Trump’s nominee to fill the Supreme Court vacancy left by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death.

Under the rule, no Senate committee or subcommittee can meet after the Senate has been in session for two hours or after 2 p.m. The move threatened to delay a briefing on national security and a confirmation hearing for Acting Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf.

Rush Limbaugh has urged Senate Republicans to skip the confirmation hearing process and head straight to a floor vote.

“I want the Judiciary Committee – that could be great if it were skipped,” Limbaugh said Monday on his daily radio program. “We don’t need to open that up for whatever length of time, so that whoever this nominee is can be Kavanaugh’d, or Borked, or Thomas’d. Because that’s what it’s going to be, especially when it’s not even required.”

President Trump is urging a vote before the November 3 Presidential election.

It is crucial to have nine justices on the Supreme Court because of election-related legislation that is and will be coming before the court. Why? Because a tie of 4-4 on any decision means that the lower court decision stands. In the case of cases like the one in Pennsylvania, it means that the vote counting will continue for days, and no postmark requirement on ballots.

Remember the 2000 election/Florida recount was finally ruled on in the Supreme Court. Something like that could happen again this year.

This entry was posted in 2020 Presidential Race, Government, Law. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to No Senate hearings for SC nominee? THAT would be interesting!

  1. The Tundra PA says:

    I’m with Rush on this one. If we’ve got the votes, just cut to the chase. Let the soi boys and snowflakes cry all they want.

    Liked by 5 people

    • lovely says:

      Agreed. No reason to give the hateful left a platform to attack and malign the nominee like they did to Kavanaugh. I will never forget the pained look on his wife’s face…makes me angry every time I think about it.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. czarina33 says:

    Just gets more interesting…

    Liked by 2 people

  3. jeans2nd says:

    Why did Senate “hearings” begin at all? For what purpose? Did a quick search but found no answers.
    “They” want to “burn it all down.”
    Well, ok. Start with tearing down this rule that requires Senate hearings.
    These hearings are never serious anymore anyway. The Socialists made certain of that a couple three decades ago, with Justice Bork and Scooter Libby.

    Liked by 2 people

    • stella says:

      I did see a series of tweets about this. The Senate did not used to have hearings and even when they did the nominee didn’t attend one until the 1930’s (I think). I’ll look see if I can find the tweets.

      Liked by 3 people

    • stella says:

      Couldn’t find tweets, but I did find this NPR article.

      https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106528133

      First though, a little historical perspective. If some senators decide to turn up the heat this week, Judge Sotomayor might wish she’d been nominated before 1916. That was the year of the first confirmation hearing for a Supreme Court justice. Until that point, the Senate simply voted yay or nay.

      Then in 1916, President Woodrow Wilson picked his aide Louis Brandeis for a spot on the court. …

      Brandeis did not attend his hearings at all. There were people supporting him and obviously people opposing him.

      RAZ: So when did nominees actually start appearing at their own confirmation hearings?

      Prof. POWE: The first nominee to do so was Felix Frankfurter in 1939. And Frankfurter, like Brandeis, was Jewish; and Frankfurter, like Brandeis, was a controversial appointment, especially for his defense of Sacco and Vanzetti during the ’20s. …

      So, at what point did you actually have this process where the nominee would come and sit down and really start to answer the questions?

      Prof. POWE: I think the turning point was Potter Stewart’s nomination in 1959. By that time, southern Democrats were fully hostile to the Supreme Court because of its desegregation decisions, and conservative Republicans were worried about the Supreme Court over national security issues, and Stewart got a fair grilling. But like other nominees, he didn’t provide them any answers.

      Beyond the bare facts, apparently they started using the hearings because of anti-semitism and racism.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply to stella Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.