• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans could delay, but not block Biden's Supreme Court pick if all Democrats back nominee

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Meaning he will most likely select an activist or closet activist who will have no chance of being confirmed.

It's a mistake he's made with several appointees.


In the first yr of presidency, Biden has withdrawn 9 nominees while Trump pulled 13, Obama 11 and GWBush 7, all with Senate and House majorities (a couple due to VP tiebreaker). I guess that means they were all picking activist or closet activist judges based on your logic.
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
In the first yr of presidency, Biden has withdrawn 9 nominees while Trump pulled 13, Obama 11 and GWBush 7, all with Senate and House majorities (a couple due to VP tiebreaker). I guess that means they were all picking activist or closet activist judges based on your logic.

I'm against any who attempt to legislate from the bench bench be they right or left
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'm against any who attempt to legislate from the bench bench be they right or left

You're avoiding defense of your claim. What is your evidence that Biden "...will most likely select an activist or closet activist who will have no chance of being confirmed." and that "It's a mistake he's made with several appointees."? Though it's your burden to prove, I went ahead and gave you researched evidence that recent history shows no significant diff from one president to the next. So, what's your evidence?
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
You're avoiding defense of your claim. What is your evidence that Biden "...will most likely select an activist or closet activist who will have no chance of being confirmed." and that "It's a mistake he's made with several appointees."? Though it's your burden to prove, I went ahead and gave you researched evidence that recent history shows no significant diff from one president to the next. So, what's your evidence?

Too late he already did based upon her numerous overturned rulings for Judicial overreach and Open Support of BLM. Should be an interesting set if Q&A during her vetting process.
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Too late he already did based upon her numerous overturned rulings for Judicial overreach and Open Support of BLM. Should be an interesting set if Q&A during her vetting process.

You make a claim without giving any proof of what you say. Thus, your claim is unfounded, without need for further debate, and dismissed for lack of evidence.
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
A
You make a claim without giving any proof of what you say. Thus, your claim is unfounded, without need for further debate, and dismissed for lack of evidence.


Actually, those have been well addressed during the confirmation hearings. Your choice to ignore them is more telling. You ask for proof, review the confirmation hearings.
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A



Actually, those have been well addressed during the confirmation hearings. Your choice to ignore them is more telling. You ask for proof, review the confirmation hearings.

It's not your claim to defend nor mine to disprove. The burden of proof is on the claim-maker, which proof has not been evidenced as being any diff than any other prez appointments to the fed bench.
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
It's not your claim to defend nor mine to disprove. The burden of proof is on the claim-maker, which proof has not been evidenced as being any diff than any other prez appointments to the fed bench.

I'd say they were well addressed during the hearings which is a moot point as she has already been confirmed.
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I'd say they were well addressed during the hearings which is a moot point as she has already been confirmed.

Confirmed but not serving because the SC goes on vacation in June until October. How much you wanna bet if it were a Rep appointed judge, they'd do everything in and out of the book to get her on the bench the next day?
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Sory
Confirmed but not serving because the SC goes on vacation in June until October. How much you wanna bet if it were a Rep appointed judge, they'd do everything in and out of the book to get her on the bench the next day?

Sorry, I don't deal in hypotheticals or alternate realities.
 

Craig234

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
29,140
Reaction score
12,416
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
I'm against any who attempt to legislate from the bench bench be they right or left

You need to learn the uncomfortable fact that THAT IS THE ONLY THING THE COURT CAN DO because the constitution is VAGUE.
 

KLATTU

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
15,387
Reaction score
5,270
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Republicans need to do an honest vetting of the nominee, and assuming there’s no huge issues, should vote to confirm.
Would make sense but wont happen.
The new norm,Created by dems, is that the other party’s nominee is too extreme thus shouldn’t be confirmed.
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sory


Sorry, I don't deal in hypotheticals or alternate realities.

It's not a hypothetical. It's a hypothesis based on evidence of fact being the immediate assignment to the bench of Amy Conan Bryant vs the delayed assignment of Jackson that invites further investigation of fact to determine the likelihood of my bet. That is reality. What counter evidence can you produce to refute that likelihood which I imply? Otherwise, my refutation of what you say stands. That's debate. You don't deal in the facts of debate, so you make an erroneous assumption, making a false claim of my post being of a hypothetical posing an alt-reality you can't prove.
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Sory


Sorry, I don't deal in hypotheticals or alternate realities.

I am proposing a possible hypothesis, not a hypothetical. They are not the same. What have you to say about the hypothesis?
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I am proposing a possible hypothesis, not a hypothetical. They are not the same. What have you to say about the hypothesis?

No, that's just another way for you to try and talk your way around it; it's a hypothetical.
 

Kpuppy0001

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 21, 2021
Messages
717
Reaction score
339
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
You need to learn the uncomfortable fact that THAT IS THE ONLY THING THE COURT CAN DO because the constitution is VAGUE.

The courts role is to rule on what a law says or whether or not it is constitutional, not to reach into the stratosphere and pull something out or their posterior. Legislating from the bench is a typical tactic of extreme Justices when Congress can't meet their ideology.
 

Craig234

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
29,140
Reaction score
12,416
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
The courts role is to rule on what a law says or whether or not it is constitutional, not to reach into the stratosphere and pull something out or their posterior. Legislating from the bench is a typical tactic of extreme Justices when Congress can't meet their ideology.
You're confused. Imagine the constitution says an item is a dark color. Now imagine you're a Supreme Court Justice who has to rule whether a shade of blue is or is not that dark color. How do you decided other pulling it out of your posterior? That's how the frickin constitution works. It has a few words, laws have millions of words. You don't get it.
 

bluesmoke

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 18, 2016
Messages
22,222
Reaction score
7,932
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
No, that's just another way for you to try and talk your way around it; it's a hypothetical.

It's me not accepting your false definition. There can be no debate if you refuse to accept standard dictionary or legal definition. You're the one trying to avoid, the facts.
 
Top Bottom