Justice Scalia Dead

Bartholomew Roberts · February 13, 2016, 05:06 PM

Died on a hunting trip.

So, the stakes for this election is about as clear as it is going to get. There are now only four votes for the Heller majority and the winner of the 2016 election is likely to appoint the successor.

Jim March · February 13, 2016, 05:11 PM

Oh crap. It just got real now.

PLUS, Conn. gunnies just appealed their state's AW ban to the Supremes, hoping to exploit the new circuit split based on the Maryland ruling.

That's now a mess.

ARG!

TXAZ · February 13, 2016, 05:13 PM

Look how fast Bush nominated 2 justices.
obama could try to make a run causing a major shift in the court in several areas.

chris in va · February 13, 2016, 05:14 PM

Any appointee has to be vetted by Congress, so his will be a real nailbiter. Sorry to see he passed.

Al Norris · February 13, 2016, 05:21 PM

It appears that the Guardian (UK) has the latest news.

Quote:

The San Antonio Express News reported that Scalia was found dead on Saturday at a ranch in the Big Bend region of Texas, south of Marfa, and said he had been staying at a ranch, for a private party, and was discovered to have died after not attending a breakfast.

Local ABC affiliate KVIA reported that Scalia died in his sleep after a day of quail hunting.

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2016/...lia-dead-at-79

This is gonna get real, very fast.

Clock · February 13, 2016, 05:35 PM

R.I.P.

It's hard not to think of how this will affect Heller. We have to get a Republican President.

2damnold4this · February 13, 2016, 05:37 PM

RIP.

csmsss · February 13, 2016, 06:03 PM

Why do you think Obama will not nominate a replacement and the Senate would not confirm? When has either house of Congress denied him anything?

raimius · February 13, 2016, 06:10 PM

RIP Justice Scalia

The legal and political ramifications may be significant.

2damnold4this · February 13, 2016, 06:15 PM

I'm glad Reid isn't majority leader but I'm still worried.

**Tom Servo** · February 13, 2016, 06:18 PM

The President will most likely submit Sri Srinivasan, a judge on the DC Circuit who was unanimously confirmed by the Senate in 2013. They'd have a hard time denying his appointment to SCOTUS.

Even if potential nominations are stalled, the math is 4-1-3 for us. We have three sympathetic Justices and four hostile ones. Kennedy remains a wild card, but without Scalia to work him, I'm not optimistic.

**JohnKSa** · February 13, 2016, 06:19 PM

[sarcasm]What is everyone so worked up about? I can't remember how many times I've read on forums like this one that it really doesn't matter who is elected to office because they're all the same.[/sarcasm]

csmsss · February 13, 2016, 06:20 PM

Here's two nightmare scenarios:
Eric Holder
Loretta Lynch

rickyrick · February 13, 2016, 06:33 PM

Well Hilary mentioned Obama to the Supreme Court not too long ago

TXAZ · February 13, 2016, 06:33 PM

Tom
There is already a growing effort to prevent 0bama from appointing any justices:

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...ma-replacement

Apparently this has been previously planned.

rickyrick · February 13, 2016, 06:34 PM

No worries they all swear to uphold the constitution

csmsss · February 13, 2016, 06:37 PM

Let's just see when the rubber hits the road. Obama will make a statement to the nation, McConnell and the rest of the Senate Republican leadership will wet their pants, and Obama will get his way yet again.

Bartholomew Roberts · February 13, 2016, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Why do you think Obama will not nominate a replacement and the Senate would not confirm? When has either house of Congress denied him anything?

The Senate Majority Leader has already expressed his opinion that the next President should nominate the replacement for Justice Scalia. From both an ideological and self-interest standpoint, the current Senate Majority party gains nothing by confirming an Obama nominee - and having pushed the bounds of tradition so hard as President, the President is hardly in a position to demand consideration of the Senate on that count.

WyMark · February 13, 2016, 07:13 PM

The argument that the court should wait more than a year for a replacement is about the dumbest thing I think I've ever heard, and assumes that the outcome of the election will be favorable. Obama has almost a year left and it's not only his right but also his Constitutional duty to put forward a nominee in a timely manner.

There's no guarantee who the next POTUS will be, or how the makeup of the Senate may change. Why would you take that chance vs. forcing Obama to send a nominee who can be confirmed by the current Senate?

kilimanjaro · February 13, 2016, 07:16 PM

Anyone still believe elections don't matter?

Glenn E. Meyer · February 13, 2016, 07:30 PM

News says Obama says he will nominate and it will probably be a judge of Indian descent from the Washington circuit. Didn't catch the name.

He was confirmed to the circuit 97/3, so it would be hard not to confirm.

Bartholomew Roberts · February 13, 2016, 07:45 PM

Eh, what was Bork's confirmation vote to the D.C. Circuit? Didn't seem to stop him from being rejected as Reagan's lame duck appointment.

Edited to correct my bad timeline. Bork was rejected in October 1987, not 1988. Douglas Ginsburg (the next nominee) then withdrew his nomination because he had admitted to usung marijuana. Antonin Kennedy was nominated in November 1987 and eventually confirmed on February 18, 1988.

TXAZ · February 13, 2016, 07:49 PM

McConnell just said 0bama won't get the pick, the next president will

Glenn E. Meyer · February 13, 2016, 07:53 PM

I read that Bork was being paid back for his role in Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre over Cox as well as being conservative.

**4V50 Gary** · February 13, 2016, 07:59 PM

I'll take Bork over 0's last two appointees.

February 13, 2016, 05:06 PM	#1
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Justice Scalia Dead Died on a hunting trip. So, the stakes for this election is about as clear as it is going to get. There are now only four votes for the Heller majority and the winner of the 2016 election is likely to appoint the successor.

February 13, 2016, 05:11 PM	#2
Jim March Senior Member Join Date: February 14, 1999 Location: Pittsburg, CA, USA Posts: 7,417	Oh crap. It just got real now. PLUS, Conn. gunnies just appealed their state's AW ban to the Supremes, hoping to exploit the new circuit split based on the Maryland ruling. That's now a mess. ARG! __________________ Jim March

February 13, 2016, 05:13 PM	#3
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	Look how fast Bush nominated 2 justices. obama could try to make a run causing a major shift in the court in several areas. __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

February 13, 2016, 06:19 PM	#12
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,992	[sarcasm]What is everyone so worked up about? I can't remember how many times I've read on forums like this one that it really doesn't matter who is elected to office because they're all the same.[/sarcasm] __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

February 13, 2016, 06:33 PM	#14
rickyrick Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2010 Posts: 8,238	Well Hilary mentioned Obama to the Supreme Court not too long ago __________________ Woohoo, I’m back In Texas!!!

February 13, 2016, 05:14 PM	#4
chris in va Senior Member Join Date: December 26, 2004 Location: Louisville KY Posts: 13,806	Any appointee has to be vetted by Congress, so his will be a real nailbiter. Sorry to see he passed.

February 13, 2016, 05:35 PM	#6
Clock Member Join Date: November 29, 2015 Posts: 77	R.I.P. It's hard not to think of how this will affect Heller. We have to get a Republican President.

February 13, 2016, 05:37 PM	#7
2damnold4this Senior Member Join Date: August 12, 2009 Location: Athens, Georgia Posts: 2,526	RIP.

February 13, 2016, 06:03 PM	#8
csmsss Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Orange, TX Posts: 3,078	Why do you think Obama will not nominate a replacement and the Senate would not confirm? When has either house of Congress denied him anything?

February 13, 2016, 06:10 PM	#9
raimius Senior Member Join Date: January 27, 2008 Posts: 2,199	RIP Justice Scalia The legal and political ramifications may be significant.

February 13, 2016, 06:15 PM	#10
2damnold4this Senior Member Join Date: August 12, 2009 Location: Athens, Georgia Posts: 2,526	I'm glad Reid isn't majority leader but I'm still worried.

February 13, 2016, 06:18 PM	#11
Tom Servo Staff Join Date: September 27, 2008 Location: Foothills of the Appalachians Posts: 13,059	The President will most likely submit Sri Srinivasan, a judge on the DC Circuit who was unanimously confirmed by the Senate in 2013. They'd have a hard time denying his appointment to SCOTUS. Even if potential nominations are stalled, the math is 4-1-3 for us. We have three sympathetic Justices and four hostile ones. Kennedy remains a wild card, but without Scalia to work him, I'm not optimistic.

February 13, 2016, 06:20 PM	#13
csmsss Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Orange, TX Posts: 3,078	Here's two nightmare scenarios: Eric Holder Loretta Lynch

February 13, 2016, 06:34 PM	#16
rickyrick Senior Member Join Date: March 15, 2010 Posts: 8,238	No worries they all swear to uphold the constitution __________________ Woohoo, I’m back In Texas!!!

February 13, 2016, 06:37 PM	#17
csmsss Senior Member Join Date: October 24, 2008 Location: Orange, TX Posts: 3,078	Let's just see when the rubber hits the road. Obama will make a statement to the nation, McConnell and the rest of the Senate Republican leadership will wet their pants, and Obama will get his way yet again.

February 13, 2016, 07:13 PM	#19
WyMark Senior Member Join Date: January 10, 2011 Location: Wyoming Posts: 647	The argument that the court should wait more than a year for a replacement is about the dumbest thing I think I've ever heard, and assumes that the outcome of the election will be favorable. Obama has almost a year left and it's not only his right but also his Constitutional duty to put forward a nominee in a timely manner. There's no guarantee who the next POTUS will be, or how the makeup of the Senate may change. Why would you take that chance vs. forcing Obama to send a nominee who can be confirmed by the current Senate?

February 13, 2016, 07:16 PM	#20
kilimanjaro Senior Member Join Date: November 23, 2009 Posts: 3,963	Anyone still believe elections don't matter?

February 13, 2016, 07:30 PM	#21
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	News says Obama says he will nominate and it will probably be a judge of Indian descent from the Washington circuit. Didn't catch the name. He was confirmed to the circuit 97/3, so it would be hard not to confirm. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

February 13, 2016, 07:45 PM	#22
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Eh, what was Bork's confirmation vote to the D.C. Circuit? Didn't seem to stop him from being rejected as Reagan's lame duck appointment. Edited to correct my bad timeline. Bork was rejected in October 1987, not 1988. Douglas Ginsburg (the next nominee) then withdrew his nomination because he had admitted to usung marijuana. Antonin Kennedy was nominated in November 1987 and eventually confirmed on February 18, 1988. Last edited by Bartholomew Roberts; February 13, 2016 at 08:31 PM.

February 13, 2016, 07:49 PM	#23
TXAZ Senior Member Join Date: September 5, 2010 Location: McMurdo Sound Texas Posts: 4,322	McConnell just said 0bama won't get the pick, the next president will __________________ Cave illos in guns et backhoes

February 13, 2016, 07:53 PM	#24
Glenn E. Meyer Senior Member Join Date: November 17, 2000 Posts: 20,064	I read that Bork was being paid back for his role in Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre over Cox as well as being conservative. __________________ NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc. - Aux Armes, Citoyens

February 13, 2016, 07:59 PM	#25
4V50 Gary Staff Join Date: November 2, 1998 Location: Colorado Posts: 21,841	I'll take Bork over 0's last two appointees. __________________ Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. *Molon Labe!*