In 2006 Barack Obama expressed his opinion on the Senate's advise and consent role regarding Supreme Court nominations. He said a few things that may come back to haunt him.
Nice Deb: "I was counting on Republicans to examine [Obama's] eventual nominee's philosophy, ideology and record. I trust the Republican will not be shy in bringing any troubling concerns to the public's attention. I'm delighted that Obama approves."
So am I.
Permalink | Linking Blogs | Sphere: Related Content | Digg this! | FARK It!
Filed under:
Barack Obama, Supreme Court
Comments (3)
I'm sure the president full... (Below threshold)1. Posted by mantis | May 1, 2009 4:54 PM | Score: -5 (5 votes cast)
I'm sure the president fully expects Republicans to do so.
One wonders, however, if those who were adamant that the Senate hold an "up or down vote" for President Bush's judicial nominees will completely abandon that position now that their only choice for opposing nominees will likely be to threaten filibuster. Ok, I don't really wonder. We all know they will.
1. Posted by mantis | May 1, 2009 4:54 PM |
Score: -5 (5 votes cast)
Posted on May 1, 2009 16:54
2. Posted by WildWillie | May 1, 2009 6:12 PM | Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
I think when it comes to the SCOTUS, the moderates will rule again. On both sides.
2. Posted by WildWillie | May 1, 2009 6:12 PM |
Score: 3 (3 votes cast)
Posted on May 1, 2009 18:12
3. Posted by Darleen
| May 2, 2009 12:43 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
at the end Obama states the primary role of SCOTUS as "the bastion of a quality of justice for the American citizen"
What the hell or rather well the hell did that pronouncement come from? SCOTUS is constrained via the Constitution to a narrow jurisdiction and its duties are to cases arising in a judicial manner with respect to Constitutional issues or between specific parties outside the scope of lower courts (ie between States). "Quality of Justice"? Um, no, otherwise why should we have any court but SCOTUS, correct?
And where is it written that "powerful" is always wrong against "weak"?
geez
3. Posted by Darleen
| May 2, 2009 12:43 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on May 2, 2009 12:43