Associate Justice Scalia

[Beaglemom3]

Early reports, unconfirmed, that he has died.


Watching updates.


CNN is reporting it now.

Waiting for NYT or WSJ reports.


-

 

[Passepartout]

Widely reported that he passed in his sleep. This will have consequences. Thoughts are with his family. R.I.P.

Jim

 

[Conan]

For the Constitutionalists:

"[The President] shall nominate, and, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for...."
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointments_Clause

 

[pedro47]

Widely reported that he passed in his sleep. This will have consequences. Thoughts are with his family. R.I.P.

Jim

R.I.P. Justice Scalia.

 

[rickandcindy23]

Sorry to hear this. I am watching HGTV so didn't know he died. This will have an impact on the future of the Supreme Court.

Enough said.

 

[WinniWoman]

Hopefully they will hold off on a replacement until the Presidential election.

 

[John Cummings]

Hopefully they will hold off on a replacement until the Presidential election.

I hope so but wouldn't count on it. The senate could tie it up until after the inauguration in January.

 

[davidvel]

This will have a significant impact on the Presidential election.

 

[Luanne]

Hopefully they will hold off on a replacement until the Presidential election.

Why? Shouldn't the position be filled as soon as possible?

It's already being reported that the Senate will block any candidate President Obama puts forward, so I'm sure you'll get your wish.

 

[Luanne]

This will have a significant impact on the Presidential election.

I'm interested in your reasoning behind this. Do you think people might change the way they vote because of this opening?

 

[SueDonJ]

Hopefully they will hold off on a replacement until the Presidential election.

Why? Shouldn't the position be filled as soon as possible?

It's already being reported that the Senate will block any candidate President Obama puts forward, so I'm sure you'll get your wish.

I don't understand the call for this. I mean, I understand why it's been called for, but I don't understand the thought process. Are we supposed to stop all government activity every 4th year?! It doesn't make any rational sense.

 

[Luanne]

I don't understand the call for this. I mean, I understand why it's been called for, but I don't understand the thought process. Are we supposed to stop all government activity every 4th year?! It doesn't make any rational sense.

The thought process in delaying confirmation? Just look at who is behind it. :ignore: (And that was not a dig at Mary Ann, just in case anyone reads it that way.)

 

[SueDonJ]

I think it's sad that he died while away from his wife and family. I'm sure he didn't run away to go hunting while his wife chased him screaming "don't go!" - - but after all their years together and the wonderful family they produced, it's sad she wasn't with him at the end.

 

[SueDonJ]

The thought process in delaying confirmation? Just look at who is behind it. :ignore:

No, the thought process that makes one think it's a rational proposal.

 

[wilma]

Hopefully they will hold off on a replacement until the Presidential election.

Why? It will delay having a new justice by a year. The campaigns are getting longer and longer so maybe nothing should get done during any campaigns.

 

[Luanne]

No, the thought process that makes one think it's a rational proposal.

I think you and I are in agreement. The normal process of replacing a Supreme Court Justice should be carried out as normal. It shouldn't be delayed due to a presidential election. And the Senate shouldn't block any nominees hoping to delay until after the election for the purpose of thinking a new president might appoint someone they may like better.

 

[SueDonJ]

I think you and I are in agreement. The normal process of replacing a Supreme Court Justice should be carried out as normal. It shouldn't be delayed due to a presidential election. And the Senate shouldn't block any nominees hoping to delay until after the election for the purpose of thinking a new president might appoint someone they may like better.

Yes, we agree. Let the process proceed as usual. There's already enough wasted time in the government, no need to artificially produce more.

 

[Talent312]

One person's rationality is another person's irrationality. This could easily turn into a debate on obstruction and get the thread closed quickly. Let's not go there.

What I think important to note is this:

1. Scalia had a significant effect on criminal law, i.e. the confrontation clause and the role of juries as finders of fact. In other respects, he was a dyed in the wool conservative, inclined to side with business interests over average folk, and willing to do his part (for good or evil) in limiting the reach of government.

2. The Court has some very important cases to be decided this term and his absence could have an interesting impact on their outcome.
.


.

 

[SueDonJ]

There was an interesting comment on CNN that I don't quite understand. It was something about all of the cases that have been heard since October but have not yet been announced, and how they're not official until they're announced. So now that Scalia is not on the Court, his votes in those matters don't count.

Did anybody else catch that and/or does anybody understand it? I have no idea what decisions/cases are impacted but found it interesting just the same.

 

[SueDonJ]

One person's rationality is another person's irrationality. This could easily turn into a debate on obstruction and get the thread closed quickly. Let's not go there.

What I think important to note is this:

1. Scalia had a significant effect on criminal law, i.e. the confrontation clause and the role of juries as finders of fact. In other respects, he was a dyed in the wool conservative, inclined to side with business interests over average folk, and willing to do his part (for good or evil) in limiting the reach of government.

2. The Court has some very important cases to be decided this term and his absence could have an interesting impact on their outcome.
.


.

But isn't that the same as saying that the rationale for delaying the process is solely influence, and not a matter which actually impedes the process?

There's a process; follow it unless there's a legitimate reason not to. Influence isn't a legitimate reason, IMO.

 

[JudyS]

I certainly hope we don't have to wait for the next President to get a new Supreme Court justice. The next President won't be in office for almost a year!

There was an interesting comment on CNN that I don't quite understand. It was something about all of the cases that have been heard since October but have not yet been announced, and how they're not official until they're announced. So now that Scalia is not on the Court, his votes in those matters don't count....

I thought CNN was talking about cases where Justice Scalia had informally expressed an opinion, but no formal vote had been held yet. However, I'm not sure.

 

[SueDonJ]

I certainly hope we don't have to wait for the next President to get a new Supreme Court justice. The next President won't be in office for almost a year!

I thought CNN was talking about cases where Justice Scalia had informally expressed an opinion, but no formal vote had been held yet. However, I'm not sure.

They touched on it so quickly, didn't they? Made me yell at the tv: "Wait, go back, that's way more important than the stupid machinations you're focusing on!"

 

[Jason245]

This will be a very interesting year. . Obama might be able to shift the court more to the liberal side as one of his legacy acts..

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

 

[Makai Guy]

That's enough politics for tonight.