Monday, April 18, 2016

SCOTUS "Fails To Act" Gambit

I'm not going to spend any time on this other than to keep track of the insanity if it becomes more widely discussed. We already know that when truth, logic, morality, law, etc are all "questionable", there are NO LIMITS!

Liberals likely feel like conservatives did when Bork was rejected, BO was elected (twice!) and a thousand other little constant things like (unbelievably) a "new" calumny of Clarence Thomas!

The difference is that conservatives have to live with disappointment constantly, liberals believe they are entitled to always have things their way!

In his op-ed, Diskant—who is a lawyer with distinguished credentials—contends that the Senate can be deemed to have waived its “advice and consent” role on a Supreme Court nomination if it “fails to act” on the nomination within a “reasonable” time—and that President Obama could therefore proceed to appoint Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court without the Senate’s ever having confirmed the Garland nomination . (Or, to be more precise, Diskant, in an apparent effort to preserve his professional credibility, claims that “it is possible to read” the Appointments Clause that way.)

1 comment:

  1. Anonymous1:05 PM

    I would think that one way that gambit could be short-circuited is to just declare that it will be taken up on January 18+, 2017--get it on the schedule, shows there is no intent to waive the intent. Now let's have the discussion just about "reasonableness" alone... anybody REALLY want to go there? Dan A.