1054
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 22 points 1 year ago

Well I suppose RGB could have retired under Obama, but we know how McConnell treated Obama's nominees

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

couldn't Obama have made an appointment while the senate wasn't in session or something? i remember reading something like that, the issue with the democrats in the US as an outside observer is that they want to maintain the facade of playing by the rules so they don't do ahit what's required, Obama should have appointed his nominee and then push on RBG to retire and appoint another, as it stands his failure is letting the US slide into fascism

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

You're referring to a recess appointment, in which the President can make certain temporary appointments without Congressional approval when Congress is in recess. But in recent times, even when Congress is technically not in session, the majority party keeps members around to gavel in quick sessions every few days so Congress never officially goes into recess.

Obama made some recess appointments anyway, and the matter is still being litigated. I bet nobody will make a substantive recess appointment until this is settled.

https://gai.georgetown.edu/supreme-court-to-decide-what-constitutes-a-senate-recess/

[-] bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone 10 points 1 year ago

The process is the justice announces retirement (or dies) and then the president appoints a nominee. Perhaps Obama didn't ask RBG to retire prior to 2014, or she refused. The president can't force a change, but just react to one.

The Republican minority prior to 2014 blocked one of Obama's recess appointments, so after 2014, even had RBG announced retirement, it was probably unlikely that a recess appointment would work. I assume at the time, they figured Clinton would be president in 2016 and that RGB could then retire during Clinton's presidency.

[-] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 5 points 1 year ago

Perhaps Obama didn’t ask RBG to retire prior to 2014, or she refused.

Apparently he didn't outright ASK but he did tactfully raise the issue.

She was stubborn though and just wouldn't do it.

[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court still require a congressional hearing and a confirmation vote in the U.S. Senate.

[-] kameecoding@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago
[-] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

Yes, after the recess which it mentions, it goes back to advise and consent. Obama could have forced a committee vote this way, but he would have lost in the end.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Iirc the president can do a temporary appointment. It will last the length of your presidency. But then the next president gets the permanent appointment.

this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
1054 points (99.1% liked)

politics

19107 readers
2008 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS