What is the current status of Merrick Garland's nomination?

[radcen]

What is the current status of Merrick Garland's nomination?

As of today, 28 June 2016, is he still officially nominated with the Senate Judiciary Committee refusing to hold hearings?

 

[Excon]

Advice and consent not given.

 

[Moderate Right]

Advice and consent not given.

Obama and his cronies are on record as claiming that if Hillary wins the election they will still go with Garland. It will be interesting to see if they try and squirrel out of that.

 

[d0gbreath]

Obama and his cronies are on record as claiming that if Hillary wins the election they will still go with Garland. It will be interesting to see if they try and squirrel out of that.

I see plenty of squirrels. None of which are Obama and his cronies.

 

[upsideguy]

Tomorrow, Obama should give the Senate 10 days to affirm Garland or he pull his nomination. That would make things quite interesting..

http://www.debatepolitics.com/gener...ck-garland-big-mistake.html?highlight=Garland

 

[Praxas]

Obama and his cronies are on record as claiming that if Hillary wins the election they will still go with Garland. It will be interesting to see if they try and squirrel out of that.

I hope the Dems pull the nomination, nominate a far lefty with a Dem congress and stick it to the Republicans who thought they could get away with not giving an up or down vote for 8 months after nomination. Teach those obstructionists a lesson.

 

[Moderate Right]

I hope the Dems pull the nomination, nominate a far lefty with a Dem congress and stick it to the Republicans who thought they could get away with not giving an up or down vote for 8 months after nomination. Teach those obstructionists a lesson.

Interesting that you should bring that up because in the last presidential debate (#2) Hillary was chastising Trump and the Republicans for not confirming Garland, praising his great credentials. I yelled at Trump and the debate moderators through the television to pin her down as saying that if she were elected president would she re-nominate Garland because of all those great credentials she was bringing up but neither Trump nor the moderators heard me. If she nominates someone else it will just go down as another "lie" from Hillary that she had this person she said had such great credentials and then she turns around and nominates someone else.

From the Republican standpoint though, I think they have done a good thing (for their side) because if Garland had been confirmed he would have made the court 5-4 left and with that seat empty the Republicans have "won" a few cases at 4-4 that they would have lost if Garland had been in there. If a miracle happens and Trump wins the court will be back to 5-4 conservative but if Trump loses the election Hillary might of course appoint an even more liberal judge than Garland but would that really make much difference overall? I mean, what difference does it make if the court is 5-4 left with a moderate liberal judge or if the court is 5-4 with a more liberal judge? Their decision was actually wise if you look at it from their perspective.