https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf

  • FirstToServe [they/them]
    hexbear
    6
    2 years ago

    To be fair, because the senate was held by republicans at that point, Obama isn't directly at fault for not getting that nomination. He's only at fault in that he sucked enough to lose the senate.

    • swampfox [none/use name]
      hexbear
      35
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Still, there was no precedent for disallowing a sitting president from appointing a Supreme Court Justice. Refusing to hold the hearing was a clear loophole/exploitation which the Dems should have combated on every front possible if they were actually concerned with exercising their electoral mandate(s)

      Their argument was largely "he already appointed 2!" and then Trump gets to chuck 3 in there within a single 4 year term with McConnell still in the senate. And I'm not complaining about the hypocrisy, I'm complaining about how fucking useless the dems are.

      That particular event was when I realized that bourgeoisie democracy was an absolute farce.

      • RedundantClam [they/them]
        hexbear
        10
        2 years ago

        They were also fucking useless not ensuring the right to abortion via legislation in Obamas first term. Obama didn't want to "divide" people. Dems sat on their hands thinking the Republicans wouldn't do what they kept saying they wanted to do.

    • DonaldJBrandon [none/use name]
      hexbear
      5
      2 years ago

      No he could have just placed someone in since they literally refused to even hold a hearing on a nominee. Could have argued that since they wouldn't hold a hearing they implicitly accept his nomination or something. It was unprecedented at the time though