Holy moly... Scalia dead.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 5:55 pm

link

Edit: now being corroborated by multiple sources.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:07 pm

Whoa. I had no idea he was 79.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:20 pm

Obviously an important career, obviously a learned justice, obviously consequential. I disagreed with just about everything he tried to push forward, but I'm not going to mock his passing.

As for political ramifications, though: absolute conservative panic is 3,2,1...

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:23 pm

Rest in Hell, Scalia.

To think that Obama gets to replace this seat.

too soon?

Teggy · Post by **Teggy** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:24 pm

This election just got much more complicated...

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:25 pm

Unagi wrote:Rest in Hell, Scalia.

To think that Obama gets to replace this seat.

too soon?

I can't see the GOP congress approving any Obama nominee now. What a clusterf**k.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:27 pm

Teggy wrote:This election just got much more complicated...

It was already going to be about the Supreme Court. Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer won't be there nine years from now.

What'll be interesting will be Republican Congressional attempts to thwart Obama's choice. I don't think they can drag it out for 11 months without political damage to themselves.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:29 pm

Teggy wrote:This election just got much more complicated...

Why? Supreme Court Justice Trump.

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:30 pm

In the interim, the Court would be deadlocked 4-4 on any major cases, which would let lower court rulings stand. didnt they just agree to hear a major abortion case, for instance?

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:31 pm

Captain Caveman wrote:In the interim, the Court would be deadlocked 4-4 on any major cases, which would let lower court rulings stand. didnt they just agree to hear a major abortion case, for instance?

It this had been Ginsburg, we would already be hearing about God's plan to overturn Roe.

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:35 pm

He will eventually nominate someone they can't just keep delaying on.
Campaign issue too, if it goes that far.... That would, IMO, sink Cruz (people would vote to keep him from getting that pick), and Trump too.
So then it goes to Bernie or Hilary.

And really, in any case - he was a nightmare. I'm glad it's over, no matter.

And with the position being 'for life', this was really the only way for that nightmare to end. This is really a good day for, well, for America.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:57 pm

For those thinking Ted Cruz might take the first shot, step forward and collect your prize. Via his Twitter page:

Justice Scalia was an American hero. We owe it to him, & the Nation, for the Senate to ensure that the next President names his replacement.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:04 pm

Smoove_B wrote:For those thinking Ted Cruz might take the first shot, step forward and collect your prize. Via his Twitter page:

Justice Scalia was an American hero. We owe it to him, & the Nation, for the Senate to ensure that the next President names his replacement.

We're going to be hearing a lot of that at tonight's debate.

Rip · Post by **Rip** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:08 pm

RIP

Nice to see you guys set the bar low for what a classless ass I can be when the next liberal justice dies.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:10 pm

I just read that the longest Supreme Court confirmation process in U.S. history was 125 days.

Obama has almost a full year remaining.

Kraken · Post by **Kraken** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:32 pm

Captain Caveman wrote:
Unagi wrote:Rest in Hell, Scalia.

To think that Obama gets to replace this seat.

too soon?
I can't see the GOP congress approving any Obama nominee now. What a clusterf**k.

Yup, that seat's going to be vacant until 2017.

Holman wrote:I just read that the longest Supreme Court confirmation process in U.S. history was 125 days.

Obama has almost a full year remaining.

Hmmm. I reckon he could go out of his way to nominate an uncontroversial moderate...but I wonder if confirming ANY Obama nominee would sting too much.

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:39 pm

Rip wrote:
set the bar low for what a classless ass I can be when the next liberal justice dies.

Oh, I don't think we could ever set the bar that low!

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:45 pm

RIP. I may not have agreed with his politics, but I respect his service. Go with God.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:53 pm

Kraken wrote:Hmmm. I reckon he could go out of his way to nominate an uncontroversial moderate...but I wonder if confirming ANY Obama nominee would sting too much.

There's a fellow that Obama appointed to the DC circuit a few years ago, who was confirmed unanimously by the Senate. There's a 0% change of a confirmation hearing prior to the next President being sworn in. Which is comical. The next President will already likely get to nominate three USSC Justices. But they will spin this as if allowing Obama to do the job that we elected him to do (twice) is the end of the world.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:53 pm

Rip wrote:RIP

Nice to see you guys set the bar low for what a classless ass I can be when the next liberal justice dies.

One guy was classless. Relax.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:11 pm

Mitch McConnell bringing some heat:

The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.

This election cycle somehow just got dialed up to 11.

Suitably Ironic Moniker · Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:16 pm

That's some serious bullshit. We would be waiting almost a full calendar year, if not longer, to fill the vacancy? Fuck that.

In regards to Scalia dying? One down, and a Cheney left to go.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:18 pm

As always, The Onion pulls no punches. "Justice Scalia Dead Following 30-Year Battle With Social Progress".

Captain Caveman · Post by **Captain Caveman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:20 pm

Smoove_B wrote:For those thinking Ted Cruz might take the first shot, step forward and collect your prize. Via his Twitter page:

Justice Scalia was an American hero. We owe it to him, & the Nation, for the Senate to ensure that the next President names his replacement.

For a dude who claims to revere the Constitution, I'd like for him to show me where presidents lose their constitutional authority in their final year in office.

tgb · Post by **tgb** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:28 pm

How delicious would it be if the conservatives get their way and the spot is left vacant, only to have it filled by Bernie? Hillary would be good, too, if only to see Rip do his Linda Blair impression.

Of course, it could be filled by Trump. Gary Busey better hurry and pass the bar if he wants to get the nomination.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:31 pm

Smoove_B wrote:Mitch McConnell bringing some heat:

The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.
This election cycle somehow just got dialed up to 11.

Yeah, seriously. We *did* have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court Justice. Did McConnell forget that we elected Obama twice for this job?

Canuck · Post by **Canuck** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:06 pm

RunningMn9 wrote:
Smoove_B wrote:Mitch McConnell bringing some heat:

The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.
This election cycle somehow just got dialed up to 11.
Yeah, seriously. We *did* have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court Justice. Did McConnell forget that we elected Obama twice for this job?

Yes, this. People voted for him knowing he would have the ability to nominate. The fact that it's his last year should have no influence on the matter.

Teggy · Post by **Teggy** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:20 pm

Holman wrote:
Teggy wrote:This election just got much more complicated...
It was already going to be about the Supreme Court. Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer won't be there nine years from now.

None of the candidates have been talking about the Supreme court, even though this is true. Now it will come front and center.

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:25 pm

Useful perspective from a reasonably sharp legal thinker:

Elena Kagan wrote:Kagan: So I think Justice Scalia is an incredibly important figure in the Court in many ways. We all sort of like to think, oh, we're Supreme Court justices, that kind of thing -- but the truth of the matter is, you wake up in a hundred years, most people are not going to know most of our names. But I think that is really not the case with Justice Scalia, who I think is going to go down as one of the most important and most historic figures in the Court. And -- there are a whole number of reasons for that, which -- this is about statutes, so let's just -- I think the primary reason for that is that Justice Scalia has taught everybody how to do statutory interpretation differently. And I really do mean, pretty much taught everybody. You know there's the classic phrase, "we're all realists now"? Well, I think we're all textualists now, in a way that just was not remotely true when Justice Scalia joined the bench.

Question: Even Justice Breyer?

Kagan: Justice Breyer might be a little bit of an outlier -- might be a little bit. In certain ways, he, too, starts with the text. Justice Scalia, for that matter, is a little bit of an outlier, is ways we can talk about, on the current Court. But I think -- sometimes he doesn't really understand how much the center of gravity has moved toward the kind of things that he's preached for quite some time, even at the same time as he's still a little bit on the edge of a spectrum. But his focus on statutory text -- on the idea that yes, Congress has written something and your job truly is to read and interpret it, and that means staring at the words on the page -- you know, it's actually remarkable to me how different that is than what it used to be.

Blackhawk · Post by **Blackhawk** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:34 pm

The timing is going to make things interesting.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:54 pm

Brief remarks by the President at the White House were respectful and laudatory.

No doubt he will be attacked as vicious and partisan in his refusal to resign on the spot.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 10:12 pm

tgb wrote:How delicious would it be if the conservatives get their way and the spot is left vacant, only to have it filled by Bernie? Hillary would be good, too, if only to see Rip do his Linda Blair impression.

Of course, it could be filled by Trump. Gary Busey better hurry and pass the bar if he wants to get the nomination.

There's actually no requirement that a Supreme Court Justice be a lawyer, and I believe there have been non-lawyers in the past.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 10:51 pm

Should someone note that Reagan was somehow allowed to nominate a Supreme Court justice during a Presidential election cycle, and somehow the world did not come to an end (or have to wait a year for the election to resolve)? Kennedy wasn't confirmed until February 1988. Why didn't Reagan have to wait until after the election so that the people could have a say in the nomination?

gilraen · Post by **gilraen** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:10 pm

Unagi wrote:He will eventually nominate someone they can't just keep delaying on.
Campaign issue too, if it goes that far.... That would, IMO, sink Cruz (people would vote to keep him from getting that pick), and Trump too.

You give way too much credit to the average voter who knows nothing about the Supreme Court, how presidential nominations work and what the consequences are.

I, however, am thrilled (not about his dying per se...it's sad and all, but the fact that he's no longer wreaking havoc from the bench). Scalia has been a disaster.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:12 pm

Teggy wrote:
Holman wrote:
Teggy wrote:This election just got much more complicated...
It was already going to be about the Supreme Court. Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Breyer won't be there nine years from now.
None of the candidates have been talking about the Supreme court, even though this is true. Now it will come front and center.

All Obama has to do is nominate a reasonable candidate that comes from the right demographics and then let Congress be themselves. Of course Obama has to also find someone willing to hold a live grenade in their lap -- might not be so easy.

Grundbegriff · Post by **Grundbegriff** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:26 pm

Toobin's pushing Srinivasan.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:34 pm

Grundbegriff wrote:Toobin's pushing Srinivasan.

That is who I'd expect - we'll see if he'll bite. Either way I have dim hopes for this working out in anything but a tragic fashion.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:55 pm

You think this is bad, wait a few months until Ginsburg announces her retirement 30 seconds after the Scalia replacement appointment is approved.

RunningMn9 · Post by **RunningMn9** » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:55 pm

Grundbegriff wrote:Toobin's pushing Srinivasan.

That's the DC Circuit guy, right? He was previously confirmed unanimously by the Senate, so presumably he's somewhat inoffensive. But he's an Obama appointee, and that won't due no matter how acceptable he was a few years ago.

Grifman · Post by **Grifman** » Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:19 am

Unagi wrote:Rest in Hell, Scalia.

To think that Obama gets to replace this seat.

too soon?

Wow, that was pretty classless.