Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.
  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • Moments Moments Moments, current page.

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
rickhasen's profile
Rick Hasen
Rick Hasen
Rick Hasen
Verified account
@rickhasen

Tweets

Rick HasenVerified account

@rickhasen

Professor of Law and Political Science at UC Irvine; Election Law Blogger. Author #JusticeofContradictions coming March 2018 http://amzn.to/2CoWbzx 

Studio City, California
electionlawblog.org
Joined June 2009

Tweets

  • © 2018 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    Rick Hasen‏Verified account @rickhasen Sep 17

    IF Kavanaugh withdraws, we face the very real possibility of Sen. McConnell trying to push a vote for another SCOTUS nominee in the lame duck, even IF Rs lose the Senate. (Two huge "ifs" there, but not impossible scenario.)

    9:51 AM - 17 Sep 2018
    • 13 Retweets
    • 64 Likes
    • Jan Ebbinge Michael V. Filippis Illinois Alan Chen Angelina Woodward Francine Lipman Glenn Fleishman Andria Krewson Sasha Samberg-Champion
    15 replies 13 retweets 64 likes
      1. New conversation
      2. Mike Sacks‏Verified account @MikeSacksEsq Sep 17
        Replying to @rickhasen

        Mike Sacks Retweeted Mike Sacks

        @danepps and I discussed this yesterdayhttps://twitter.com/MikeSacksEsq/status/1041398862714470400 …

        Mike Sacks added,

        Mike SacksVerified account @MikeSacksEsq
        Replying to @danepps
        I think that is where Collins and Murkowski will get off the bus
        1 reply 1 retweet 4 likes
      3. Rick Hasen‏Verified account @rickhasen Sep 17
        Replying to @MikeSacksEsq @danepps

        I was mercifully away from Twitter for most of yesterday

        1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
      4. 1 more reply
      1. New conversation
      2. Jonathan Bernstein‏Verified account @jbview Sep 17
        Replying to @rickhasen

        Sure. Nothing wrong with that. Totally reasonable to confirm during a lame duck. OTOH, if they don't act soon, it's going to be a tight squeeze.

        1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
      3. Matt Glassman‏ @MattGlassman312 Sep 17
        Replying to @jbview @rickhasen

        Only reason they'd have to vote in lame duck is if they lose Senate. Given red state Dems might bail post Nov, it actually might help hold Collins/Murkowski on a Barrett vote. If they *hold* Senate, they could vote next Congress, but Collins/Murkowksi might have more leverage.

        2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
      4. Nate Silver‏Verified account @NateSilver538 Sep 17
        Replying to @MattGlassman312 @jbview @rickhasen

        I wonder if post-midterms, Collins (and maybe others like Gardner?) start to think of it as their reelection year and so are more reluctant to take an unpopular vote.

        6 replies 4 retweets 28 likes
      5. Jonathan Bernstein‏Verified account @jbview Sep 17
        Replying to @NateSilver538 @MattGlassman312 @rickhasen

        I suspect that whatever happens in the midterms McConnell will be eager to move on a hypothetical Kavanaugh replacement as quickly as he can.

        2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes
      6. Nate Silver‏Verified account @NateSilver538 Sep 17
        Replying to @jbview @MattGlassman312 @rickhasen

        I just think confirmation in the lame duck is a long way from a slam dunk *if* the GOP fails to hold the Senate (which would require a BIG wave).

        2 replies 4 retweets 15 likes
      7. Matt Glassman‏ @MattGlassman312 Sep 17
        Replying to @NateSilver538 @jbview @rickhasen

        There would be enormous pressure on them from the right to confirm *someone*, because the threat of the Dems holding the seat open for 2 years---or worse, possibly striking a bargain with Trump for a moderate nominee--would be a dead serious concern.

        4 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
      8. Nate Silver‏Verified account @NateSilver538 Sep 17
        Replying to @MattGlassman312 @jbview @rickhasen

        OK but if the GOP loses 45 House seats and also loses the Senate, and they have lots of vulnerable Senators up for re-election in 2020....they're going to be terrified. And confirmation in the lame duck would be a *really* unpopular move.

        4 replies 3 retweets 20 likes
      9. Jonathan Bernstein‏Verified account @jbview Sep 17
        Replying to @NateSilver538 @MattGlassman312 @rickhasen

        Eh. I do think some panic is possible, but I'm skeptical it would be an election issue two years on. And they would still have to worry that the only people who would remember it would be intense GOP party actors. No slam dunk, but there's plenty of incentive to confirm quickly.

        3 replies 1 retweet 7 likes
      10. 11 more replies
      1. New conversation
      2. Jamal Greene‏ @jamalgreene Sep 17
        Replying to @rickhasen

        Might the D's respond by dispensing with unanimous consent, forcing the reading of amendments, calling for roll calls, etc.? (Not sure how long that would run the clock in this hypo.)

        2 replies 4 retweets 5 likes
      3. Ira Goldman  🦆 🦆 🦆‏ @KDbyProxy Sep 17
        Replying to @jamalgreene @rickhasen

        Yep, that option has always been there. And yet, they haven't done it.

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      4. Jamal Greene‏ @jamalgreene Sep 17
        Replying to @KDbyProxy @rickhasen

        The politics of grinding the Senate to a halt in general are different from the politics of doing so within a specific time frame and over a specific grievance.

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      5. Ira Goldman  🦆 🦆 🦆‏ @KDbyProxy Sep 17
        Replying to @jamalgreene @rickhasen

        True. But Maj Ldr can do a number of creative things to make this not as daunting as it might seem. Plus, it's not as if this Senate has been considering lots of amendments & passing lots of bills. In a lame duck, how many bills would McConnell really want to pass? \_(?)_/

        1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
      6. Jamal Greene‏ @jamalgreene Sep 17
        Replying to @KDbyProxy @rickhasen

        Right. That's why I said I'm not sure it would work.

        0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
      7. End of conversation
      1. New conversation
      2. 𝕋𝕄‏ @timmooney Sep 17
        Replying to @rickhasen

        No question. Quick back of the napkin math from my @scotuscast colleague (and Senate rules guru) @AdamShah1972 suggests there’s plenty of time to push another nom through even with a post-election Day nomination. Hypothetically.

        1 reply 1 retweet 1 like
      3. Adam (((Shah)))‏ @AdamShah1972 Sep 17
        Replying to @timmooney @rickhasen @scotuscast

        Yes. Here are the things that the rules require: 1) Senate Rule XXXI states a nominee is automatically referred to the committee of jurisdictions unless there it is ordered otherwise, but such motion would be 60-vote filibusterable. 2) Senate Judiciary Committee Rule 1 states

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      4. Adam (((Shah)))‏ @AdamShah1972 Sep 17
        Replying to @AdamShah1972 @timmooney and

        that any business can be delayed by one week by any member of the Judiciary Committee, meaning that the minority can force the Committee to take at least seven days to vote on whether to report the nomination to the full Senate (seven days from nomination to Committee vote).

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      5. Adam (((Shah)))‏ @AdamShah1972 Sep 17
        Replying to @AdamShah1972 @timmooney and

        3) Senate Rule XXXI also states that no nominee can be considered on the same day she is reported to the full Senate by the Committee (one day from Committee vote to floor consideration). 4) Senate Rule XXII says that a cloture motion on pending business cannot be voted on until

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      6. Adam (((Shah)))‏ @AdamShah1972 Sep 17
        Replying to @AdamShah1972 @timmooney and

        the second day after it was filed (two days from the beginning of floor consideration until cloture vote) 5) Senate Rule XXII allows 30 hours of debate from the time cloture is invoked until the up-or-down vote (1.25 days from cloture vote to confirmation vote).

        1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
      7. Adam (((Shah)))‏ @AdamShah1972 Sep 17
        Replying to @AdamShah1972 @timmooney and

        The absolute minimum under Senate rules is therefore 11.25 days. And that would be with no background check and no hearing, which even under Sen. McConnell's leadership is extremely unlikely.

        0 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
      8. End of conversation

    Loading seems to be taking a while.

    Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

      Promoted Tweet

      false

      • © 2018 Twitter
      • About
      • Help Center
      • Terms
      • Privacy policy
      • Cookies
      • Ads info