Sen. Collins (R-ME) after Garland mtg "the next step in my view should be public hearings before Judiciary Comt." pic.twitter.com/cVxTvO7j5D
— Luke Russert (@LukeRussert) April 5, 2016
Not snark, for once — there seems to be a grinding shift in the Conventional Wisdom (note source of above tweet). Senator Collins’ bold centrism might be connected to a report in The Hill:
Reid plots strategy to force vote on Obama nominee
Senate Democrats say they may try to force a vote on President Obama’s nominee to the Supreme Court with an unusual procedural tactic.“There are many procedural things we can do,” Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid (Nev.) said Tuesday when asked about the possibility of using a discharge resolution to bypass Republicans…
He and his Democratic colleagues want to keep the pressure on Republicans to hold hearings on the nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, believing they have the upper hand in the public relations battle.
“The obligation is for them to hold hearings and to have a vote. That’s in the Constitution,” Reid said. “Right now, we think we’re in a good place. The pressure’s on them, not on us.”…
Reid added that Grassley now has a more competitive reelection race. Democrats have recruited former Iowa Lt. Gov. Patty Judge, the toughest opponent he has faced in years.
“No one thought he would have a race,” he added. “This is a real drag on the Republicans.”
Reid noted that more than a dozen Senate Republicans have agreed to meet with Garland, although most have made clear they will do so only as a courtesy.
In addition to Kirk and Collins, at least 15 other Republicans have voiced willingness to meet. They are Sens. Kelly Ayotte (N.H.), John Boozman (Ark.), Bill Cassidy (La.), Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Grassley, Orrin Hatch (Utah), James Inhofe (Okla.), Ron Johnson (Wis.), James Lankford (Okla.), Moran, Murkowski, Rob Portman (Ohio), Mike Rounds (S.D.), Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Pat Toomey (Pa.)…
Senator Grassley has responded to this pressure with his usual gracious elan, per Politico:
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee criticized John Roberts on the Senate floor Tuesday, accusing the chief justice of contributing to the growing politicization of the Supreme Court.
In a speech about 10 days before Justice Antonin Scalia died, Roberts warned that the trend of approving qualified Supreme Court nominees along party-line Senate votes undermines the legitimacy of the court. “The process is not functioning very well,” Roberts said.
“In fact, many of my constituents believe, with all due respect, that the chief justice is part of the problem,” Grassley said of Roberts, who has at times incensed conservatives with his votes to uphold Obamacare and other rulings. “They believe that [a] number of his votes have reflected political considerations, not legal ones.”…
The Iowa Republican went on to warn Roberts not to inject himself into the Senate showdown over whether Garland should be confirmed this year, which Republicans have vowed will not happen. Grassley said Roberts has been encouraged by some academics to urge the Senate to take up Garland’s nomination…
Responding to the speech, a spokesman for Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) called Grassley “unglued” and said his remarks represent “an epic display of buck-passing.”
Double dog dare ya, Chuck! Also, there’s this note from the Washington Post…
… Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who endorsed Trump after abandoning his own presidential bid, said that he spoke with Trump by phone on Tuesday about a list of 10 to 12 judges from whom the billionaire might fill vacancies on the Supreme Court.
Trump plans to release the names in the coming weeks as a sign of his seriousness and a validation of his claims to being a conservative, Carson said….
Serious as a heart attack, and validating our Democratic claim that the GOP is being held hostage by a vulgar short-fingered carnival barker…
***********
Apart from our healthful daily helping of schadenfreude, what’s on the agenda for the day?
Betty Cracker
I hope the Dems get as much mileage out of this as they can, but I doubt very much Garland will get an up-or-down vote. ETA: Prior to November, anyway…
JPL
@Betty Cracker: It’s difficult to get much mileage out when the news media is busy covering Trump.
Isn’t it time for the DC Madam’s phone list to be released. Please let it be Cruz.
Ben Cisco (onboard the Defiant)
Nothing like the fear of losing your job to make you do your job. Chris Rock had this covered though: you don’t get a cookie for doing what you’re SUPPOSED to do.
Baud
Not a bad idea from Trump. Juicers, please use this thread to let me know if you’d like to be on the SCOTUS short list. If possible, please link to pictures of you in a robe. It’s important to look the part.
Baud
Font on the mobile site is much smaller.
Linnaeus
I should probably go to bed. Night all.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud: I sat in on a law school class once, so I’m in. Is the robe worn like a kilt?
OzarkHillbilly
@Baud: I have the perfect robe.
Baud
@BillinGlendaleCA:
With nothing underneath? Yes.
qwerty42
@Baud: Am in a bathrobe right now! Does that count as a “robe” or do I need something more formal?
Baud
@qwerty42:
You’d be replacing Scalia, so no.
bystander
One of the wags on Wait Wait said Obama should have nominated Grassley. That’s funny until you realize that not even a wink would be given to the hypocrisy of changing his opinion before you’d be saying, “Hello, Justice Grassley.”
Baud
Topical (NYT)
NotMax
@Baud
Will either of these do? Tradition, but no requirement, that the robes be dour black.
;)
OzarkHillbilly
The STL County Board of Elections were like a bunch of monkeys fvcking a football yesterday:
63 precincts, 24 polling places. These guys are gonna get tarred and feathered for denying the vote to some of the wealthier denizens of this fair metropolis. Meanwhile, in STL city where all the poor folk live:
Earnings tax, bond issue overwhelmingly pass in St. Louis
Fvck you Koch Brother wannabe Rex Sinquefield.
** another example of Republican love of meddling in local governance when the state lege passed this law a few years ago
Mustang Bobby
@Baud: I have my cap, gown, and hood from my doctoral graduation. I’m set.
Baud
Atlantic
Baud
@NotMax:
I’ve never been a robe guy (I prefer capes!) but holy cow those look awesome.
Van Buren
Senator says we should do our job; Village has collective orgasm
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
@Baud: Unmentioned is a place where I’d really like to see a liberal court make a difference: anti-trust law. Let’s roll back the Borkian revolution of basically declaring that any merger is fine.
bystander
Sorry if this has already been posted but I just saw this on JoeMyGod.
Seems the newly named Antonin Scalia School of Law has an acronym problem.
Laughing at Dead Tony is so much more fun than laughing at Animated Tony.
EconWatcher
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: Overturning Citizens United is the big kahuna. Everything else pales.
satby
@Baud: oh, but I was told it’s my senile old eyes the last time it happened.
bystander
@Baud: Sorry. Just saw.
Hey, I’ve got a great Japanese-style robe from 10,000 Waves. It has a big Japanese character on the back that means, I think, “L-XL”
qwerty42 endorses Baud! 2016!!
@Baud: Good to know.
satby
@satby: and if you zoom it the comments drop off at both ends, so you’re only able to read the middle. But at least it’s back to the mobile site (1 column) instead of the mini desktop site that showed up last night.
satby
So, I miss any really great threads since Saturday? I have lots of catching up to do!
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@Baud:
I had a business law class in university, taught by a former DA. I am ready willing and able to make the jump to the USSC!
Seriously, I have a lot of concern about a Justice Garland and have no problem with him being shut out by the wingnuts. The current situation highlights the real problem in DC.
Baud
@satby: I am right there with you in senility.
Patricia Kayden
@Baud: LOL!! Will me in my bathrobe cut it? Is this for you or for Trump? I assume Palin has the SCOTUS Head Justice position locked down for any Trump Presidency.
@JPL: Unfortunately, SCOTUS denied the release of the little black book.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/scotus-denies-request-dc-madam-s-attorney-release-info-n551121
Baud
@Tissue Thin Pseudonym: I don’t think we’ll go back to the old days of “big is bad,” but we might get more actual scrutiny.
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): I personally don’t have any issues with Garland. He’s a good judge.
satby
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): got you beat, I have a paralegal certificate from Roosevelt University. I did that before I switched to IT 20 years ago.
I think threaded comments are back too? I have 2 reply buttons.
rikyrah
Good Morning ?, Everyone ?.
satby
@Baud: come sit beside me and we can share our tapioca pudding.
OzarkHillbilly
I am now a subscriber of the Orange Street News. Some of this girl’s biggest fans wrote in and said:
She replied:
debbie
@bystander:
How stupid were they not to see this at the beginning?
Baud
@satby:
That sounds lovely. You watch out for kids on the lawn, I’ll look out for clouds to yell at.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@Baud:
No doubt, he is a very reasonable guy with a good legal mind. I think he would fall mostly on the correct side of most issues but have concerns about his rulings on the rights of accused and the rights of businesses. Given 30 years of awful rulings I’d like to think we could find an equal legal mind with a better chance of fixing some of the worst damage done.
OzarkHillbilly
@satby: I’ve got you all beat. The amount of time I have spent in court over the years adds up to at least 2 years of law school.
Baud
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
I agree we could probably find someone more to the left. That doesn’t rise to the level of “concern” about Garland for me. YMMV.
MomSense
Is there a magnifying glass app?
debbie
I’m pretty psyched to read about this. And judging by the reactions of financial executives, it’ll do some good.
They complain about onerous regulations, a law of too many pages, that people won’t bother reading the contracts they have to sign with their brokers, etc.
These guys haven’t changed a bit; still looking to screw over as many people as possible.
satby
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): I think that Obama took that into consideration nominating Garland. I think he’s a good judge too, and will be more willing to roll back some of the egregious unprecedented decisions that Fat Tony delighted in.
satby
@OzarkHillbilly: I have always believed experience is the best teacher.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@OzarkHillbilly:
LOL!
When I was a kid my dad did a lot of business with the pols in city hall, in the summer time I would occasionally go with him & sit in court rooms to watch what was going on. I’m convinced I could do better than many of the actual lawyers I saw perform there. Not sure It would add up to 2 years though! My favorite thing as a kid was seeing a judge smack a lawyer around for screwing up or not being prepared. It happened 3-4 times and as a kid I was amazed that adults did that to each other (I thought it was just teachers over kids). A couple of the reprimands were particularly brutal.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@Baud: @satby:
I’m not convinced Obama didn’t select Garland for the political reasons, they are just too perfect to be accidental.
I’m OK with him on the court just not enthused. I am loving watching the goppers twist in the wind though.
satby
@MomSense: seriously
debbie
@OzarkHillbilly:
NPR just did a segment on this and played a few of her comments. I love the end of her response to the complaints: “There! Is that cute enough for you?” in her little, bitty voice.
satby
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): One of the most legendary smackdowns in a written judicial ruling is here, and well worth the read.
OzarkHillbilly
@satby: I could happily have done without some of that experience.
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): Court is boring as all hell interspersed with moments of absolute hilarity.
NotMax
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
Actually witnessed a lawyer request and be granted a continuance because his client’s defense depended on getting hold of a “Mr. Greenback.”
JPL
@Patricia Kayden: boo… Cruz is so smarmy and the time frame fits. If Trump won the presidency, there’d be impeachment talks the first month he’s in office. If Cruz won, students would be forced to study the bible and there would be a nineteen percent federal sales tax on all incomes.
Baud
@Patricia Kayden: The lawyer said before he was going to violate the court order and release it anyway.
raven
@Mustang Bobby: and tassel!
Baud
@raven: The tassel provides gravitas. A must.
Baud
Testing Reply option 2.
satby
Yep, threaded.
Baud
Yep. Threaded.
OzarkHillbilly
@satby:
I love it.
satby
Psyche!
Now, does everyone see these? And I will never use the threaded again after this.
Baud
Ha! We really do share the same senile thoughts.
BillinGlendaleCA
@satby: Nope, you and Baud! are special.
Baud
@BillinGlendaleCA:
True.
I’m on the mobile site. I don’t know if the threaded comments are visible on the website.
OzarkHillbilly
@satby: My own personal favorite is a divorce proceeding Moore v Moore in SW Missouri, from which we get:
Gin & Tonic
@Baud: I thank all that is holy to any of us that no, there are no threaded comments on the desktop version. Now crawl back in your hole and never speak of this again.
JGabriel
Politico via Anne Laurie @ Top:
OMG! The Chief Justice is listening to people educated in law and the history of our country? He must be stopped. That’s downright un-American!
Tissue Thin Pseudonym
@EconWatcher:
Bullshit. Citizens United is the great white whale that obsesses everyone, but it’s not like the problems in our campaign finance system just materialized when it was decided. Like it or not, there is very real tension between the First Amendment and campaign finance laws, and getting rid of the influence of money cannot happen without a constitutional amendment, and even then it will be fiendishly complex.
satby
@OzarkHillbilly: I read the whole judgment years ago, link is there to the entire think. A work of beauty for law geeks.
satby
@OzarkHillbilly: aww, that’s nice.
satby
@BillinGlendaleCA: thank you for noticing ?
AxelFoley
@Baud:
Guaranteed job for life, have interns do most of your work, don’t speak for years if you don’t want to…
Hell, yeah! Sign me up!
schrodinger's cat
@Baud: My robe is green, will that do?
OzarkHillbilly
@satby: There was also this pearl of legal reasoning:
** there are four Stone County Freedoms:
(in reading the pleadings, it becomes obvious that a man has a right to deal in livestock without wifely interference, and a separate right to trade in livestock)
The whole thing is hilarious.
bystander
I keep reading the title of this post as, “Good News for Judy Garland”.
cmorenc
@JPL:
Careful what you wish for – Cruz turning up on that list *before* he becomes the nominee at the GOP convention would create a much better political footing for the GOP establishment to give the nomination instead to either Kasich or some other tougher opponent in the general election. That still wouldn’t get around their problem how to keep the hard-core Trumpsters from wreaking havoc at the convention and possibly staying home or going 3P in November – but the GOP’s position would be doubly impossible if they had to deal with both angry Cruz supporters and angry Trump supporters if they tried to give the nomination to someone who didn’t run in the primaries.
Bobby Thomson
Faux centrism. Collins would not have said that if Garland had a prayer at getting a hearing.
Aleta
@OzarkHillbilly: edited, removed, cause my paste of quote didn’t work for me. Is this my iPad or what?
Aleta
Maybe upgrade-related: When I copy a phrase from someone else’s quote (text from elsewhere put in by a FP post or in another comment), it gets pasted in as the words “flat white” when using an iPad.
chopper
@Baud:
they can still rename the main building the Antonin Scalia School’s Hall Of Legal Excellence.
chopper
Jesus what the hell is this shit?
Mandarama
@OzarkHillbilly: These proceedings remind me of a favorite story, Mary E. Wilkins Freeman’s “The Revolt of ‘Mother’.“
Hunter
“Trump plans to release the names in the coming weeks as a sign of his seriousness. . . .”
As a sign of his cluelessness, maybe. Releasing the names of possible Supreme Court nominees before you’re even elected? That’s not the sort of thing you do. Just, No.
SiubhanDuinne
@OzarkHillbilly:
Here is what is totally adorable about the grauniad’s article on the nine-year-old journalist: their own byline:
boatboy_srq
Speaking as a once-and-sometime Downeastah, the idea of Collins as a moderate and a centrist is appalling and nauseating.
Keith G
@Betty Cracker:
2 months ago, I sided with he saying and the conventional wisdom that Obama should not withdraw his nomination after the presidential election. I have since changed my mind because allowing the Republicans to gain the system and then giving them the option of approving this very moderate Canada after the results of November are known gives them a win without any blowback
boatboy_srq
FYWP. Two attempts to edit my comment – first one comment window disappeared, second coughed up “you do not have permission…”
Keith G
Wow, please forgive the above comment. While speaking into a phone and letting word recognition do the heavy lifting I accidentally hit publish. Which would normally not be a huge deal except for the fact that as of now on the mobile version I’m using there is no edit option.
What the fuck is happening to this mobile site?
Jay C
Two points occurred to me while reading this post:
1. I am amazed that Sen. Grassley can still breath under that pile of bullshit he’s excreted regarding the SCOTUS vacancy. In the same couple of paragraphs, he accuses CJ Roberts of “politicizing” the Court’s nomination process, then defends his obstructionism on absolutely nothing other than purely political grounds: for which, of course, he blames Roberts. What a putz.
2. Long shot though it may be*, if anyone can finagle a way around Republican obstruction and get Judge Garland’s nomination up in front of the Senate, it’s Harry Reid. I think he would retire a happy ex-Senator if he could leave with a Garland vote (regardless of the outcome) as his last FU to the GOP. He (like Obama) is a politician I already miss….
*as I’ve opined before, I think even in a Balloon Juice comment
cokane
As I said originally, R’s promise to not vote on a nominee this year was a total bluff. Can’t take R bluster on ANYTHING seriously anymore.