Scalia dies on quail hunting trip

[MKSheppard]

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/us-wor ... er-desktop

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was found dead of apparent natural causes Saturday on a luxury resort in West Texas, federal officials said.

Scalia, 79, was a guest at the Cibolo Creek Ranch, a resort in the Big Bend region south of Marfa.

According to a report, Scalia arrived at the ranch on Friday and attended a private party with about 40 people. When he did not appear for breakfast, a person associated with the ranch went to his room and found a body.

Chief U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia, of the Western Judicial District of Texas, was notified about the death from the U.S. Marshals Service.

U.S. District Judge Fred Biery said he was among those notified about Scalia's death.

"I was told it was this morning," Biery said of Scalia's death. "It happened on a ranch out near Marfa. As far as the details, I think it's pretty vague right now as to how," he said. "My reaction is it's very unfortunate. It's unfortunate with any death, and politically in the presidential cycle we're in, my educated guess is nothing will happen before the next president is elected."

[Borgholio]

Am I an asshole for being glad he's dead, giving Obama the chance to appoint a more liberal judge to the bench before (Dog forbid) a Republican gets elected to the white house?

[Alyrium Denryle]

I have been waiting for this fucker to die for as long as I have been alive. So...

[Lost Soal]

Am I an asshole for being glad he's dead, giving Obama the chance to appoint a more liberal judge to the bench before (Dog forbid) a Republican gets elected to the white house?

The Republicans will do everything they can to delay and stop any nomination process to ensure Obama can't do jack about replacing him.

[Borgholio]

I would expect them to try, but an Associate Justice nomination has never successfully been blocked by the Senate in history. Chief Justice, yes...but not associate. So if the GOP can manage this, it would be an historic first.

[Alyrium Denryle]

I would expect them to try, but an Associate Justice nomination has never successfully been blocked by the Senate in history. Chief Justice, yes...but not associate. So if the GOP can manage this, it would be an historic first.

There are still enough Elder Statesmen in the senate to make the rest of their attempts to be malignant children not amount to much.

[Elfdart]

Has Dickless Cheney been drinking again?

[Mr Bean]

Justice Scalia dead? And under President Obama's watch? Well stand by for the 2016 political season to explode and with a Republican controlled congress it gets even more interesting... more than more than interesting is the fact that they can either Filibuster nominees... or prehaps if they want to be clever, spend a month in hearings (After a month of delay) then vote no making the President have to put someone else up. That could easily eat up five or six months worth of time and they only need to stall for nine before they see if they will get a Republican or Democrat in for the next vote.

*Edit
Republican staffers already tweeting No replacement under Obama

Thats.... hilarious sad and tone deaf.

[Zeropoint]

Given that no man is an island entire of itself, and any man's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind . . . I'll restrict myself to observing that I don't feel much sadness at Scalia's death.

[Borgholio]

Looks like the political wrangling has already begun. Senate Republicans are already saying they won't confirm anyone until the next president.

[The Romulan Republic]

Am I an asshole for being glad he's dead, giving Obama the chance to appoint a more liberal judge to the bench before (Dog forbid) a Republican gets elected to the white house?

Personally I find it distasteful, to say the least, to celebrate the death of another person. But I also know you'll be far from the only one who's glad Scalia's gone.

Celebration is premature in any case, however. Republicans will fight tooth and nail to block anyone Obama tries to appoint who even approaches being a decent judge. I'm already hearing talk about them trying to block anyone until after the election.

Edit: Preempted. But yeah, that basically fits with what I've been hearing, Borgholio.

[Dominus Atheos]

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) said in a statement that the Senate should not confirm a replacement for Scalia until after the election.

“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,” McConnell said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

[Borgholio]

The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice.

Yeah I laughed when I read this. The people should NOT have a voice in selecting the members of the Supreme Court. That's how the fucking Constitution intended it. But naturally, Republicans will only claim to be supporters of the Constitution when it's convenient for them.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky) said in a statement that the Senate should not confirm a replacement for Scalia until after the election.

“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,” McConnell said.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

If they really think that they should try and pass a law allowing SCOTUS to be elected wholesale.

[Napoleon the Clown]

Am I an asshole for being glad he's dead, giving Obama the chance to appoint a more liberal judge to the bench before (Dog forbid) a Republican gets elected to the white house?

Personally I find it distasteful, to say the least, to celebrate the death of another person. But I also know you'll be far from the only one who's glad Scalia's gone.

Celebration is premature in any case, however. Republicans will fight tooth and nail to block anyone Obama tries to appoint who even approaches being a decent judge. I'm already hearing talk about them trying to block anyone until after the election.

Edit: Preempted. But yeah, that basically fits with what I've been hearing, Borgholio.

Scalia was a net harm on humanity and social progress, I see nothing wrong with being glad that there's one fewer shitbags on this planet.

[Gerald Tarrant]

I would expect them to try, but an Associate Justice nomination has never successfully been blocked by the Senate in history. Chief Justice, yes...but not associate. So if the GOP can manage this, it would be an historic first.

That statement isn't really true. Check out Lyndon Johnson's nominations. In '68 Republicans and Senate Dixiecats filibustered a chief justice nominee and the associate who would replace him. The nominee withdrew himself, and Nixon's appointee went through. I'd also remind you that Bush jr. Attempted to put the white house council (Harriet Meyers iirc) on the Supreme Court and she also withdrew herself. So we have appointments to the Supreme Court failing, even if they withdrew and were not voted down.

[Borgholio]

True, but I don't consider a withdraw to be the same thing. Obama could appoint a hyper-liberal and withdraw if it's clear it won't work. But then if he appoints anyone who is on the left (even if only by a little) then the GOP will try to fully block it anyways whether or not he withdraws the candidate.

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

I would expect them to try, but an Associate Justice nomination has never successfully been blocked by the Senate in history. Chief Justice, yes...but not associate. So if the GOP can manage this, it would be an historic first.

That statement isn't really true. Check out Lyndon Johnson's nominations. In '68 Republicans and Senate Dixiecats filibustered a chief justice nominee and the associate who would replace him. The nominee withdrew himself, and Nixon's appointee went through. I'd also remind you that Bush jr. Attempted to put the white house council (Harriet Meyers iirc) on the Supreme Court and she also withdrew herself. So we have appointments to the Supreme Court failing, even if they withdrew and were not voted down.

They can put holds and filibusters on any Obama nominee and bog down the process for months to delay a vote on it. And they do have the votes necessary to block a nominee, if they care that much about it. If all else failed, Obama could always recess appoint Scalia's replacement, but that might have blowback effects on his Democratic successor's campaign for the White House.

[Starglider]

I thought recess appointments were temporary, 12 to 18 months unless confirmed by vote?

[TimothyC]

I thought recess appointments were temporary, 12 to 18 months unless confirmed by vote?

They are temporary until you have a new congress (January 2017), and the Senate gets to decide when the Senate is in recess, as was confirmed in NLRB v. Canning, where Scalia wrote for a 9-0 decision that the president could not declare the senate to be in recess. Expect there to be no official recesses between now and the end of the term.

[Grumman]

Am I an asshole for being glad he's dead, giving Obama the chance to appoint a more liberal judge to the bench before (Dog forbid) a Republican gets elected to the white house?

Personally I find it distasteful, to say the least, to celebrate the death of another person.

That depends on the person. If someone force-fed Abu Bakr a cruise missile I know I'd be celebrating, but that's a rapist trying his hardest to be Muslim Hitler, not just the one of nine people on the Supreme Court whose opinions you particularly oppose.

And really, Obama hasn't been showering himself in glory either. If Supreme Court judges reflect the will of the Presidents who appoint them, then three of the nine judges will have been appointed by the man who assassinated Anwar al-Awlaki and his son, allowed the NSA turn upon the American people, punished whistleblowers and protected torturers.

[Flagg]

Whishes can come true! I'd like to thank God, Santa, and the best fictional character inexplicably believed in by the masses of all: Satan!

The most hateful, disgusting, and all around less-than-human when it comes to empathy turd plopped down on the highest bench in the land is dead as the piece of shit he is, all while on a despicable canned quail hunt. I mean I wanted him and Thomas to be found dual-stroked with one balls-deep in the other, but it's still an early Christmas!

But no matter how the nominating process goes down, the Rethuglicans (truly living up to that moniker), will be voting on a nominee selected by a Democratic President whether before or after the upcoming election. And the best part is, due to McCuntles antics, it may very well be a Democratically held Senate, so by all means, let Senate Majority Leader MBitch cut his nose off to spite his face.

[Flagg]

Am I an asshole for being glad he's dead, giving Obama the chance to appoint a more liberal judge to the bench before (Dog forbid) a Republican gets elected to the white house?

Personally I find it distasteful, to say the least, to celebrate the death of another person. But I also know you'll be far from the only one who's glad Scalia's gone.

Celebration is premature in any case, however. Republicans will fight tooth and nail to block anyone Obama tries to appoint who even approaches being a decent judge. I'm already hearing talk about them trying to block anyone until after the election.

Edit: Preempted. But yeah, that basically fits with what I've been hearing, Borgholio.

Scalia was a net harm on humanity and social progress, I see nothing wrong with being glad that there's one fewer shitbags on this planet.

He's also one of the shitbags that against all precedent (and which he and the rest of the conservatives on the court have ignored as precedent setting) voted to install idiot and warmonger George W. Bush and Dick Cheney as POTUS and VPOTUS which caused an untold number of deaths and an unimaginable amount of suffering in the Middle East, alone. He was a net harm on the human race and his death was a net gain, as you said. I'm glad Someone dropped a house on him.

[Rogue 9]

NPR

Obama Remembers Scalia As 'Consequential,' Vows To Appoint Replacement
Updated February 13, 201611:43 PM ET Published February 13, 20169:05 PM ET

Domenico Montanaro

President Obama struck a somber tone, remembering the late-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as a "towering legal mind" who influenced a generation, but made it clear, he intends to replace him.

"I plan to fulfill my constitutional obligation to appoint a successor — in due time," Obama said, adding that he expected a fair hearing and a timely vote.

Obama, who spoke for just a few minutes, praised Scalia and said it was a day to remember Scalia's "remarkable" life. But make no mistake, Obama's comments about naming a replacement were aimed squarely at Senate Republicans who have already said a replacement should not come until a new president is elected.

"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," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

The majority leader sets the agenda in the Senate.

"The fact of the matter is that it's been standard practice over the last nearly 80 years that Supreme Court nominees are not nominated and confirmed during a presidential election year," said Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would have to vote to confirm a nominee. "Given the huge divide in the country, and the fact that this President, above all others, has made no bones about his goal to use the courts to circumvent Congress and push through his own agenda, it only makes sense that we defer to the American people who will elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice."

Grassley's statement originally said it was "standard practice" over the last 80 years to not confirm a Supreme Court nominee during a presidential year. But Justice Anthony Kennedy was confirmed in February 1988 by a 97-to-0 vote. He was nominated in November 1987.

Obama said making an appointment and giving that appointment a speedy vote was "bigger than any one party." He said it was "about democracy" and "about the institution" Scalia served.

UPDATE: President Obama spoke with Scalia's son, Eugene, per the White House. He passed "along condolences to the entire Scalia family on the passing of his father. The President extended his sympathies on behalf of the First Family and the country," said White House spokesman Eric Schultz.

[Flagg]

NPR

Obama Remembers Scalia As 'Consequential,' Vows To Appoint Replacement
Updated February 13, 201611:43 PM ET Published February 13, 20169:05 PM ET

Domenico Montanaro

President Obama struck a somber tone, remembering the late-Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia as a "towering legal mind" who influenced a generation, but made it clear, he intends to replace him.

"I plan to fulfill my constitutional obligation to appoint a successor — in due time," Obama said, adding that he expected a fair hearing and a timely vote.

Obama, who spoke for just a few minutes, praised Scalia and said it was a day to remember Scalia's "remarkable" life. But make no mistake, Obama's comments about naming a replacement were aimed squarely at Senate Republicans who have already said a replacement should not come until a new president is elected.

"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," said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

The majority leader sets the agenda in the Senate.

"The fact of the matter is that it's been standard practice over the last nearly 80 years that Supreme Court nominees are not nominated and confirmed during a presidential election year," said Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would have to vote to confirm a nominee. "Given the huge divide in the country, and the fact that this President, above all others, has made no bones about his goal to use the courts to circumvent Congress and push through his own agenda, it only makes sense that we defer to the American people who will elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice."

Grassley's statement originally said it was "standard practice" over the last 80 years to not confirm a Supreme Court nominee during a presidential year. But Justice Anthony Kennedy was confirmed in February 1988 by a 97-to-0 vote. He was nominated in November 1987.

Obama said making an appointment and giving that appointment a speedy vote was "bigger than any one party." He said it was "about democracy" and "about the institution" Scalia served.

UPDATE: President Obama spoke with Scalia's son, Eugene, per the White House. He passed "along condolences to the entire Scalia family on the passing of his father. The President extended his sympathies on behalf of the First Family and the country," said White House spokesman Eric Schultz.

The fact is that the Rethuglican Senaturds hold the cards when it comes to voting Obama's nominee and no matter how "bipartisan" or qualified the nominee, the fuckers will by no means approve them. He could reanimate Antonin Scalia and they would block the nomination. But Obama, not being an idiot, knows it will make the Rethuglican controlled Senate look like the bloated colon it is.