Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Politics & GovernmentPolitics · 1 month ago

Do you agree with Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the matter of filling high-court vacancies in election years?

in 2016, when a lame-duck President Obama tabbed Merrick Garland to replace the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, Democratic leaders had no problem with the move. And neither did Ginsburg.

"There's nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being the president in his last year," Ginsburg said in a 2016 New York Times interview in which she called for Garland to receive a confirmation vote in the Senate.

As for whether the Senate should take up a vote on Garland, Ginsburg said at the time, "That's their job."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/flashback-in-2016...

3 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    "and then the republicans refused to hear about obama's nominee" -- listen closely sparky, when democrats have a majority, they don't hesitate to block and obstruct all-things Republican, and push their own agenda.  But we have a majority now -- can't have it both ways. 

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Trump is going to fill the seat, and I don't agree with anything ginsburg says.

    No offense, but this tw@t thinks that she gets to will her seat upon her passing as her last wish.  And the funniest part?  Is that DEMOCRATS ARE ACTUALLY OUTRAGED THAT HER LAST WISH IS NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED

    How demented, deranged, stupid, and ignorant can you be, to think you get to choose a successor?  This is one more reason why I hate demonrats.  They think what they 'feel' should override anything and everything they want.  

    Trump is going to fill the seat, demonrats are going to continue to be rabid, the end. 

  • 1 month ago

    But they didn't.  The thing about laws is consistency.  The GOP overwhelmingly said they weren't going to vote on Garland that year because it was an election year.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.