Can someone ELI5 why it matters where in the 4-year term a Supreme Court nomination occurs? The risk of it happening in the 4th year was presumably already accounted for when the rule was made.
Conversation
Replying to
The republicans stole the last one saying you had to wait. This time they say no wait so they can steal this one too.
1
Why is it even up for debate? It’s not 5 years or 3 years, or some other tricky rule. Maybe the last president did allow his pick to be stolen but that’s on him. How long does this go on? Why does the next president get the blame and why should he be forced to give up his right?
2
6
Show replies
Replying to
It's the same way that the bill of rights doesn't grant rights, it protects you from the state on your natural rights.
Neither the president nor the Supreme Court define true justice, they function to defend it.
Bias in appointment threatens the courts legitimacy to the public.
1
4
The Supreme Court appointments are being treated like a game -- because that's our political system. But unlike chess you don't win by pinning your opponent with a technicality.
2
Show replies
Replying to
The natural Schelling points are the election or the inauguration. The election is a very civil, reasonable choice - don’t do it as a lame duck, but do it any other time.
A functional democracy would do that. Both sides have been bogus.
3
Replying to
I said the same thing.
Tonight: the election is in a month!
Me; OK, so we agree the election hasn’t happened yet, let alone the inauguration, so what’s the issue?
🤷♂️
2
Replying to
I think the thing which matters is the small bit in an old document about the separation of executive, legislative and judicial functions of government. With everything so politically charged I can’t see how any separation can occur.
Also a mandatory retirement age would be good
1