It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: TheJesuit
I saw the article the other day about this. There just isn't a provision for this. And to make one, it would likely take a constitutional amendment. It's important enough to warrant one IMHO. But nobody needs to jump the gun on making rash decisions. That usually comes back to bite folks square on the ass.
originally posted by: Bluntone22
I watched my dad physically deteriorate into his 80s. He told me on more than one occasion that his mind just wasn't sharp as it used to be. I have a hard time believing Ruth Bader Ginsburg is not in the same situation. She should have resigned several years ago but her ego keeps her in.
originally posted by: xuenchen
Something very big is about to be announced.
Something eerie and deceptive 😎
Mitch McConnell gambled that a republican would win and stopped any nominations in the end for obama then trump started nominating judges like crazy past two years
Did Biden really say he would be against the president nominating a Supreme Court justice in an election year when political control of the Senate and White House were flipped? We wanted to use our In Context feature to lay out what Biden said back then outside of McConnell’s sound bite. Readers can determine if it’s relevant now. Biden's floor speech was on June 25, 1992, more than three months later in the election cycle than it is now. There was no Supreme Court vacancy to fill. There was no nominee to consider. The Senate never took a vote to adopt a rule to delay consideration of a nominee until after the election. Nonetheless, Biden took to the floor in a speech addressing the Senate president to urge delay if a vacancy did appear. But he didn't argue for a delay until the next president began his term, as McConnell is doing. He said the nomination process should be put off until after the election, which was on Nov. 3, 1992. Many of Biden's words echo the state of Washington today: "Given the unusual rancor that prevailed in the (Clarence) Thomas nomination, the need for some serious reevaluation of the nomination and confirmation process, and the overall level of bitterness that sadly infects our political system and this presidential campaign already, it is my view that the prospects for anything but conflagration with respect to a Supreme Court nomination this year are remote at best."
so hes up to 85 with 61 current vacancies that he intends to fill , for comparison sake Obama got 329 in 8 years
The 44 judicial nominees passed out of the committee marks the most approved in a single markup since 1981. The picks will now head to the full Senate where, if confirmed, they will join the 85 judges Trump has named to the federal bench, including two to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Senate is largely expected to confirm the nominees, as Republicans hold 53 seats. The president’s success with installing federal judges has been a key achievement of his administration.