President Obama To Announce Merrick Garland As Supreme Court Nominee

[arch stanton]

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/03/16/470643431/-i-ve-made-my-decision-on-supreme-court-nominee-president-obama-says?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=politics

 

 

Garland, who is currently the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, is a former prosecutor who's viewed as a moderate. He has also cultivated a reputation for openness and collegiality at the D.C. Circuit, a bench that's sometimes called the second most important in the land.

 

[wopphil]

I don't know much about this guy, but in the face it looks like it would be a dumb political move to stonewall him. This is probably the best the Republicans can ever hope to get from a Democratic president.

Which means the Republicans will completely screw this up and Hillary will appoint the next justice (and probably one more liberal than this guy).

[arch stanton]

Because I'm sure you all assumed he was a minority

[Spirit]

I'm not surprised Obama nominated an old white person.  Just look at their roster of presidential candidates. 

[Guest]

Because I'm sure you all assumed he was a minority

He is a minority. Last I recalled, Judaism isn't a majority religion in the US.

Edited March 16, 2016 by failos

[red321]

Moderate pick, and probably a little older than most people nominated (63).

 

And I agree with wopphil, the Republicans will **** the goat on this one because that's what nihilists do.

[mtangelsfan]

They will totally screw this up, because that is what they have become.  A laughing stock.

 

Not only will they screw this up, but all the while knowing that they are going to get Cruz (who they hate, hate, hate) or Trump who hates them.

 

I find this quite humorous.

[nate]

He seems well qualified... so I am sure politics will get in the way.

[Adam]

This whole liberal vs conservative judge thing is stupid. Law is supposed to be objective and it shouldn't matter. 

[Lhalo]

Hahaha. Oh man! Adam is on a roll today!

[gotbeer]

Sure, why not.  Compared to a presidential candidates, this sounds quite pleasant.

[Angelsjunky]

This whole liberal vs conservative judge thing is stupid. Law is supposed to be objective and it shouldn't matter. 

 

You realize that people write laws, right? That laws change?

[Adam]

Oh I am well aware of the human desire for self-importance. 

[Adam]

Are you aware that you're basically unlikable? 

[Angelsjunky]

Are you aware that you're basically unlikable? 

 

Christ, how old are you, Adam? 12?

[nate]

Are you aware that you're basically unlikable? 

 

hahahahahahahaha

[red321]

Good to see that the Republicans have already shit the bed...

 

 

We totally think the next president should pick the nominee! The people should have a voice! (ignoring that they elected the current president).

 

Unless Hillary wins, and then we'll consider this guy in a lame duck session...because apparently the people's choice won't matter at that point?

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hatch-open-to-garland-in-lame-duck

[mp170.6]

This whole liberal vs conservative judge thing is stupid. Law is supposed to be objective and it shouldn't matter. 

 

There's a difference though between liberal and conservative as a jurist vs. their own political beliefs.  It's not the same thing.

[mp170.6]

Christ, how old are you, Adam? 12?

 

No, he's 13.  He married his wife when he was 11 and she was 32. 

[mtangelsfan]

Good to see that the Republicans have already shit the bed...

 

 

We totally think the next president should pick the nominee! The people should have a voice! (ignoring that they elected the current president).

 

Unless Hillary wins, and then we'll consider this guy in a lame duck session...because apparently the people's choice won't matter at that point?

 

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hatch-open-to-garland-in-lame-duck

 

 

While this reasoning has been used before, its still dumb as shit.  The sitting president makes the nomination.  The congress' job is to vet the nominee and make sure he/she is qualified.  Its amazing how such a simple process has been completely corrupted.

[gotbeer]

While this reasoning has been used before, its still dumb as shit.  The sitting president makes the nomination.  The congress' job is to vet the nominee and make sure he/she is qualified.  Its amazing how such a simple process has been completely corrupted.

 

Yup.  You could say that the president not making the nomination is a president not doing his job. 

 

But I guess congress would rather not do their job.

 

From the sounds of it, this dude is a good fit for both parties.  Might be the best that each side can get, because you know the next president will nominate someone that is quite entrenched on their side.

[red321]

While this reasoning has been used before, its still dumb as shit.  The sitting president makes the nomination.  The congress' job is to vet the nominee and make sure he/she is qualified.  Its amazing how such a simple process has been completely corrupted.

 

Used before? Contrary to pronouncements to the contrary this reasoning has not actually been used before, or at least in the last century or so.

[mtangelsfan]

This is a surprisingly smart pick from Obama.  He has put the stupid republicans in a corner now.

[mtangelsfan]

Used before? Contrary to pronouncements to the contrary this reasoning has not actually been used before, or at least in the last century or so.

 

Geez red, you always want more.

 

Greedy you are.

[mtangelsfan]

I should have used the word "made" instead of "used".