#Cruz lame duck president supreme court free#
Today, reader support makes up about two-thirds of our budget, allows us to dig deep on stories that matter, and lets us keep our reporting free for everyone. If you value what you get from Mother Jones, please join us with a tax-deductible donation today so we can keep on doing the type of journalism 2023 demands. Mother Jones was founded as a nonprofit in 1976 because we knew corporations and billionaires wouldn't fund the type of hard-hitting journalism we set out to do. They were able to use an ethics scandal to gin up opposition, and Fortas never even made it to a floor vote.īy signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from Mother Jones and our partners. It was because Republicans and Dixiecrats were pissed off at the Warren Court, and preventing LBJ from elevating Fortas to chief justice was a way of showing it. Republicans have the power to delay in hopes of electing a Republican in November, and that’s what they’re going to do.ġAbe Fortas was rejected during the 1968 election year, but this had nothing to do with any kind of hallowed tradition. “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice,” he said yesterday, and that’s that. He says the Senate won’t vote on a replacement for Scalia because, basically, they just don’t want to. In any case, congratulations as usual to Mitch McConnell for not bothering with this self-righteous pretense. Perhaps Scalia should be posthumously censured for having the gall to break this custom. Anthony Kennedy aside, the reason Supreme Court nominees haven’t been confirmed during election years for the last few decades is just coincidental: none of them happened to have died or retired during an election year. It’s a deeply held American tradition not to confirm Supreme Court justices during an election year. This has quickly become a meme on the right. “It’s been standard practice over the last 80 years to not confirm Supreme Court nominees during a presidential election year,” thundered Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee, which will hold hearings on Obama’s nominee. “We have 80 years of precedent of not confirming Supreme Court justices in an election year,” Ted Cruz agreed, apparently not realizing that Anthony Kennedy was confirmed in 1988. “It’s been over 80 years since a lame duck president has appointed a Supreme Court justice,” Marco Rubio said last night, apparently not understanding what “lame duck” means. That’s hardly unexpected, but what cracks me up is their effort to make this sound like a principled stand. Republicans are pretty unanimously refusing to consider confirming a Supreme Court nominee to replace Antonin Scalia before the election. The passing of Scalia, who he called "a lion" and "one of the greatest" justices in history, led Cruz in the last 24 hours to argue a Democratic-nominated justice would have huge implications on the direction of the country.Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters. John Adams was defeated for re-election by Thomas Jefferson in November of 1800, but remained in office as a 'lame duck' until March 1801. For months on the campaign trail, Cruz has emphasized the implications of a Democratic presidency on shifting the balance of the court. That frequent shock line on the road often initiates the great alarm and audible awes among his conservative crowds. "If liberals are so confident that the American people want unlimited abortion on demand, want religious liberty torn down, want the Second Amendment taken away, want veterans' memorials torn down, want the crosses and stars of David sandblasted off of the tombstones of our fallen veterans, then go and make the case to the people," Cruz provoked. "I think his passing yesterday really underscores the stakes of this election," Cruz said, adding that the GOP "ought to make the 2016 election a referendum on the Supreme Court." The potential impact of Scalia's death on the court will now be a key political issue through the rest of the presidential contest and Cruz laid down the stakes of the fight on Sunday. We're advising that a lame-duck president in an election year is not going to be able to tip the balance of the Supreme Court."
"You know what? The Senate is advising right now. "The Senate's duty is to advise and consent," Cruz said. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said on NBC's "Meet the Press" that it is "not remotely" the Senate's obligation to consider the Supreme Court nominee that President Barack Obama will choose following the sudden death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
0 kommentar(er)
