This website uses cookies

As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: "https://hubpages.com/privacy-policy#gdpr"

Show Details
Necessary
HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
HubPages Traffic PixelThis is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.
Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
Features
Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
Marketing
Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
Remarketing PixelsWe may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking PixelsWe may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Statistics
Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (30 posts)

Is it fair for Sen. McConnell to say that Obama should not be allowed to name a

  1. Credence2 profile image80
    Credence2posted 2 years ago

    Is it fair for Sen. McConnell to say that Obama should not be allowed to name a Scalia successor?

    I want to see among the hub pages community who clearly falls on one side or the other

  2. emge profile image71
    emgeposted 2 years ago

    I think this is a very fair demand. Lets not forget that Obama at a number of times has shown that he is dictated by partisan interests, to show the world  god knows what. I think in the best interest of the USA the appointment should be left to  the new president who ever he shall be. It will be following the principle of natural justice so important in American jurisprudence.

    1. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      I disagree, all Presidents have considered ideological and political interests in their selection, what sets Obama apart?
      Thanks for your reply.....

    2. Daniel Gottlob profile image78
      Daniel Gottlobposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      What is natural justice?

  3. M. T. Dremer profile image95
    M. T. Dremerposted 2 years ago

    McConnell is only stalling in the hopes that a conservative president will win the election and choose a conservative successor. Obama still has most of 2016 left as the president. There is no reason why he shouldn't select a successor. Presidents have done it for ages.

    1. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      "INDISPUTABLY QUALIFIED?" WHAT R THEY GOING TO DO NOW?  MAKE THEMSELVES LOOK WORST PREVENTING NOMINEE?
      THEY'D BETTER BE CAREFUL!  IF THEY KICK THE CAN, HILLARY WILL APPOINT AN EVEN MORE LIBERAL JUSTICE!

    2. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Thats the rub, the GOP takes the chance of taking the cash now or finding out what is behind curtain no. 2

    3. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      KEEP PLAYING!

      "ZONK!"

      GOD IS BEHIND THIS & THEY CAN'T WIN, EITHER WAY! 

      PAYBACK FOR TRYING TO BLOCK EVERYTHING OBAMA TRIED TO IMPLEMENT & HAVING TO "GO ALONG TO GET ALONG!"

      "YOU REAP WHAT U SOW" (GAL 6:7)!

  4. Daniel Gottlob profile image78
    Daniel Gottlobposted 2 years ago

    Both sides of the aisle could have at least waited until Scalia was buried to start politicizing who will take his place.

    The longest vacancy until now has been 363 days. If they were to wait for a new President to be sworn in   that is 341 days plus the time it takes for a review. I think fair is hard to judge, a Senate sitting on a nomination is however not new but this duration could potentially be the longest depending on who is elected president.

    I don't think it was a wise move by McConnell to state that out front. I think waiting to hear who the appointment was going to be would have been much more tactful.

    That being said it is a big year in general for the Supreme Court with cases on Abortion, Unions, Affordable Care Act and etc. Plus as there are only 8 justices, that means that if there is a tie, the lower court's ruling stands.

    Plus this makes this a huge issue for the next President as both Scalia and likely Ginsburg's seat will be filled next administration.

    Obama should be able to make a nomination, but the Senate does not have to approve it. I think the big issue for me is the un-eloquent timing and the immediate stance taken.

    1. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Does "the lower court's ruling stand" or will that court's decision only be a temporary and not a permanent ruling?

    2. Daniel Gottlob profile image78
      Daniel Gottlobposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      In the event of a tie the ruling of the state court is upheld. There is some fancy term for it but the states ruling would be held until retrialed or the laws change.

    3. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      "UNTIL RETRIALED" BY SCOTUS RIGHT? SO TEMPORARY WHICH MAKES FOR ADDITIONAL WORK ONCE NEW JUSTICE APPOINTED & ALREADY BACKLOGGED! 
      SENSELESS CREATING ADD'L WORKLOAD ON SCOTUS!
      CONT OBSTRUCTION,HILLARY WINS,"MORE LIBERAL" JUSTICE WILL BE APPOINTE

    4. Daniel Gottlob profile image78
      Daniel Gottlobposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Not really. For example if Texas courts ruled that abortions were illegal & it went to the SCOTUS & there was a tie. The ruling by TX that it's illegal would stand. There is no retrial when there are 9 members. A diff. case would have to over

    5. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      According to "The Blaze.com" "when there is a 4-4 split, the lower court's decision is withheld, but there is no precedent set. But there's an important caveat to the latter point: that decision ISN"T automatically considered "legal precedent."

  5. profile image57
    Norine Williamsposted 2 years ago

    If it were the Democrats, they'd do the same things (as they have in the past)!  It's called "Politics!" 

    It's sad!  Especially since it reflects so poorly on the SOCTUS! Doesn't show that it has very much power only that "the majority" rules be "it" right or wrong!

    I see the SOCTUS as "Justice" for ALL, but what happened?  What happened to the scale that depicts "balance" (Justice)?  It seems Justice is now "Just US" which is "the majority!" 

    It should NEVER be about "falling on one side or the other," rather standing for what is RIGHT according to the WORD of GOD!

    America is in trouble in that it continues to appease "what man wants" rather than considering what GOD has said!  But it's OK!  GOD will ALWAYS "work it out!" 

    Whether the US knows it or not, SATAN has ALREADY been defeated whether it appears so or not! 

    The new appointee (if Democrat) will certainly bring about changes this SCOTUS has NEVER known!

    1. Sam Montana profile image43
      Sam Montanaposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      The Supreme Court has become as partisan as the congress, amazing anything gets done in this country with the extreme partisanship and not one bit of compromise.

    2. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      AMEN!  ALL ABOUT "WINNING" NEVER HUMANITY!

  6. pagesvoice profile image84
    pagesvoiceposted 2 years ago

    Let's not forget, this is the same Mitch McConnell who was holding meetings behind closed doors in November, prior to Obama's first inauguration, attempting to make him a one-term president. Well, that strategy didn't work and President Obama was elected a second time. Consequently, it comes as no big surprise that Mitch is up to his usual tricks. McConnell was already rallying his troops to block Obama's nomination before Scalia's body was even cold. I guess in Mitch's world it is politics first and humanity second.

    1. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Amen!  But we must also consider how Democrats have done the same as Mitch is doing in the past!  It seems "ALL" sees "politics first and humanity (or what is right) second!"  Politics?  Dirty world!

    2. pagesvoice profile image84
      pagesvoiceposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      You make a valid point. I guess that is one of the reasons why I never went into politics.

    3. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      THANK GOD HE HAS CHOSEN ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL WHICH IS TOTALLY OPPOSITE!  BUT I FIND IT AMUSING HOW "SMALL MINDED" & EVIL THE WORLD IS FOR "SELF GRATIFICATION!"

  7. bradmasterOCcal profile image32
    bradmasterOCcalposted 2 years ago

    This comes at a very delicate time for the US. The final throws of the presidential campaign have already been wrapped around the emotional and political busy box. The presidential campaign unfortunately is following its traditional Red Herring distraction to avoid real issues, and fixed political positions of its candidates.

    With less than nine months left in this race, there has been little forward movement for the voters to make intelligent points. Too date most of the time has been spent on name calling and conjecture. So there are no real data points to make anything other than a loyal party decision on the candidates.

    Add to this political seesaw, the distraction caused by a president who has already disenfranchised the legislative branch of the US government, who now can do the same for the Judiciary Branch because of his political leanings.

    The SC was meant to be outside of the political pressure, and that is why the appointment to the SC is for a lifetime. But putting in a politically biased person as that lifetime Jurist makes it politically tainted, and a impediment to the SC making decisions on solving the problem before the court.

    This is especially difficult for the court to do because of the simple majority of the court to make its decision. Does it really make sense for one voice to dictate the decision for the entire country?
    Remember, these dynamics last for several decades. We have had some many bad decisions from the SC, that we can't afford to have several decades more of them because a president wants to play politics with our governmental checks and balances.

    1. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      "But putting in a politically biased person as that lifetime Jurist makes it politically tainted, and a impediment to the SC making decisions on solving the problem before the court."
      Why "tainted" now? Did it "make sense" when leaning in opp dir?

    2. pagesvoice profile image84
      pagesvoiceposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Every president who has had the opportunity plays to their political base. After all, it was Ronnie Reagan who appointed Scalia.

    3. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      As for the quality of Supreme Court decisions that is a matter of opinion. The Constitution of the United States gives the sitting President the perogative to fill the vacancy. That must not be superceded by partisan politics from either side.

    4. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      DL: TRUE! 
      CRED: Yes, "Matter of opinion!" But always "superseded by partisan politics from either side~!"

    5. bradmasterOCcal profile image32
      bradmasterOCcalposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      This is a unique time because the SC has made some political decisions during Obama, and the Congress hasn't been this gridlocked when other pres submitted SC jurists. Also, they didn't legislate via EO as much as Obama.

    6. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      GOOGLE www.pleasecutthecrap.com TO SEE THE WORKS OF OBAMA! BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY?

    7. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      To Bradmaster, I don't see any unique circumstances that would justify the GOP to offer obstruction to the President in Constitutional duty to appoint court justices.  About EOs, incorrect. Obama has not used them any more frequently than other Prez

    8. profile image57
      Norine Williamsposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Sharp it's he?  Nominating "Liberal Republican?" 
      If they oppose they will continue to make themselves look like fools! 
      Obama's Right!  No red or blues, but justice!

 
working