Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

He must have told someone in the White House. They need the distraction and they want to ensure he leaves, so you get the leak.

aezmvp said:

---

BenFiasco14 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Multiple sources tell me Justice Breyer was not planning to announce his retirement today. They describe him as "upset" with how this has played out. We still await any official notice from his office and/or the #SCOTUS public information office.

— Shannon Bream (@ShannonBream) January 26, 2022

---

Poor Breyer! He should remain on the bench until January 24, 2023, to spite these people who leaked it!

---

If he announces that he plans to stay on for another term just because the liberals botched this... OMG.

Also pick based on wrapping and plumbing (original, aftermarket or imaginary) worked out so well the first time, I'm just sure this will be just as good.

---

That would be amazing.

This was timed to get the news away from Ukraine/Russia.

aggiehawg said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

Bet the Dem attacks on Manchin and Sinema stop now.

---

Dem donors are already lining up to primary Sinema. Of course she could just switch parties since she's probably on the ideological level of Mitt.

IDaggie06 said:

---

This was timed to get the news away from Ukraine/Russia.

---

I thought Ukraine/Russia was timed to get the news away from some other thing.
Is this like the old lady who swallowed a fly?

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Well, if the new nominee is alleged to have raped someone as a teenager, it won't be a liability, but rather a resume enhancement, because things are (D)ifferent now.

---

Street Cred!!

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

I don't see Manchin or Sinema being a no vote on virtually any likely Biden court nominee. They might have to resort to the tie breaker, but no Democrat will break ranks on this, so long as the nominee is credible enough to get a floor vote.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Psych said:

---

Get Off My Lawn said:

---

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

Biden should tap Harris for SCOTUS. He’ll get the first woman of color on the bench plus he’ll get to pick a new VP that people actually like.

— Drew Holden (@DrewHolden360) January 26, 2022

---

Would she be able to vote for herself to break the 50:50 tie?!

---

Not sure about the voting for herself, but how would they be able to confirm a new VP without her vote?

---

She can vote for herself to break the tie.

---

...and then the Senate tie breaker would be gone, leaving a hung Senate with no subsequent VP nomination getting approved as a replacement!

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson not only attended Harvard law she's also a member of the Harvard Board of Overseers since 2016. So that affirmative action case involving Harvard would require her recusal were she on the Court.

aggiehawg said:

---

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson not only attended Harvard law she's also a member of the Harvard Board of Overseers since 2016. So that affirmative action case involving Harvard would require her recusal were she on the Court.

---

Hilarious. Would certainly make for some fun questions during confirmation, particularly about Biden's promise to appoint a black woman.

twk said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson not only attended Harvard law she's also a member of the Harvard Board of Overseers since 2016. So that affirmative action case involving Harvard would require her recusal were she on the Court.

---

Hilarious. Would certainly make for some fun questions during confirmation, particularly about Biden's promise to appoint a black woman.

---

I would be somewhat surprised if it were her since she's only been on the DC Circuit COA since last June. She was narrowly confirmed to fill Garland's seat by a vote of 53-44.

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

I don't think these dynamics are in play here, actually.

Manchin and Sinema aren't going to block any SCOTUS nominee Biden puts up. Here's why:
1. They are still Democrats to the core, and I doubt Biden could nominate anyone so radical that they would object to.
2. The media isn't going to scandalize a Biden nominee like they did Trump's nominees, so it won't be such a political hot potato.
3. Because of #2, I just don't think this is going to get on the Give-a-Crap Radar of the average joe voter, so Manchin and Sinema will not feel like their political future is threatened if they vote to confirm.
4. The same goes for any other Senator in a potential swing state. This issue won't be one that they feel the voters will care too much about either way, because the media isn't going to make this front page news like they did with Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett.

So...Biden will make a way left liberal pick (just like Obama did with Sotomayor and Kagan) and the nomination will breeze through the Senate confirmation without breaking a sweat.

Should've announced he'll appoint an "African American Menstrator"

twk said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

I don't see Manchin or Sinema being a no vote on virtually any likely Biden court nominee. They might have to resort to the tie breaker, but no Democrat will break ranks on this, so long as the nominee is credible enough to get a floor vote.

---

There is the nominee at hearing, but first there is the list of nominee prospects. That's were the negotiations happen with the most conservative members of the democratic caucus and the most liberal members of the republican caucus.

Keegan nailed it.

This is an unwinnable battle for Republicans. Give the Democrats who they want, replacing a liberal with a liberal is no big deal.


Save your bullets for a real fight.

Keegan99 said:

---

He knew this was his only chance to retire before 2030. The Dems will lose the Senate and the ability to push through a leftist in November. And it won't get any better.

---

Yep - pretty much verifies that the Dems know they are going to get shellacked.

Tramp96 said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

I don't think these dynamics are in play here, actually.

Manchin and Sinema aren't going to block any SCOTUS nominee Biden puts up. Here's why:
1. They are still Democrats to the core, and I doubt Biden could nominate anyone so radical that they would object to.
2. The media isn't going to scandalize a Biden nominee like they did Trump's nominees, so it won't be such a political hot potato.
3. Because of #2, I just don't think this is going to get on the Give-a-Crap Radar of the average joe voter, so Manchin and Sinema will not feel like their political future is threatened if they vote to confirm.
4. The same goes for any other Senator in a potential swing state. This issue won't be one that they feel the voters will care too much about either way, because the media isn't going to make this front page news like they did with Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett.

So...Biden will make a way left liberal pick (just like Obama did with Sotomayor and Kagan) and the nomination will breeze through the Senate confirmation without breaking a sweat.

---

See post above.

And I disagree. With a 50/50 split and the dems in more conservative states and districts up for reelection, SCOTUS nominations are absolutely at play. It's why McConnell was able to do what he did in 2016 to Garland.

I wish it were not this way. It should not be this way. But the Democrats 75 year strategy of getting the courts to legislate from the bench has made this process a far bigger deal than the passage of a $1-$6 Trillion funding package.

Sorry asian, white, and hispanic women. As with everything else, your position on the victim ladder has been usurped. Better luck next time.

Dos Tortugas said:

---

Could be a good way for him to offload Kamala.

---

She failed the bar and would be the first justice to do so if she were nominated.

policywonk98 said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

I don't think these dynamics are in play here, actually.

Manchin and Sinema aren't going to block any SCOTUS nominee Biden puts up. Here's why:
1. They are still Democrats to the core, and I doubt Biden could nominate anyone so radical that they would object to.
2. The media isn't going to scandalize a Biden nominee like they did Trump's nominees, so it won't be such a political hot potato.
3. Because of #2, I just don't think this is going to get on the Give-a-Crap Radar of the average joe voter, so Manchin and Sinema will not feel like their political future is threatened if they vote to confirm.
4. The same goes for any other Senator in a potential swing state. This issue won't be one that they feel the voters will care too much about either way, because the media isn't going to make this front page news like they did with Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett.

So...Biden will make a way left liberal pick (just like Obama did with Sotomayor and Kagan) and the nomination will breeze through the Senate confirmation without breaking a sweat.

---

See post above.

And I disagree. With a 50/50 split and the dems in more conservative states and districts up for reelection, SCOTUS nominations are absolutely at play. It's why McConnell was able to do what he did in 2016 to Garland.

I wish it were not this way. It should not be this way. But the Democrats 75 year strategy of getting the courts to legislate from the bench has made this process a far bigger deal than the passage of a $1-$6 Trillion funding package.

---

I so hope you are right, I really really do. But I just don't see it happening. He's going to nominate someone radically left based on skin color and gender, and the Senate is going to confirm at record speed.

I hope I'm wrong and you are right, but I don't think I'm going to be wrong on this.

I know it goes with out saying, but so much irony in that Joe is limiting this to a black female in order to not be racist. The exact opposite of what MLK stated. Racism and sexism is certainly live and will in the United States of Propaganda..

IDaggie06 said:

---

I know it goes with out saying, but so much irony in that Joe is limiting this to a black female in order to not be racist. The exact opposite of what MLK stated. Racism and sexism is certainly live and will in the United States of Propaganda..

---

The Left do not view affirmative action as racist.

The Left are also mentally ill.

Agree and disagree. I don't think you lay down for some unqualified radical nominee. Even a Merrick Garland "moderate" exposes himself as a tyrant once in power. Push for a compromise candidate and take that as a win if you get it. Or if not, you have to expose a radical nominee even if the outcome is a foregone conclusion.

rgleml said:

---

When you mention recusal, you should consider the fact that Justice Kagan did not recuse herself concerning the Obamacare case, even though she was part of Obama's White House staff prior to joining the Supreme Court.
Do not expect a liberal/progressive to recuse themselves from anything, no matter how biased they are.

---

Yeah, but Brown Jackson is actually on the Board that oversees policy at Harvard. That would include their admissions policies.

aggiehawg said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

Bet the Dem attacks on Manchin and Sinema stop now.

---

And the RNC needs to be running ads in WV and AZ right now.

pic.twitter.com/V6VnPI95tt

— Art TakingBack 🇺🇸 (@ArtValley818_) January 26, 2022

Tramp96 said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

policywonk98 said:

---

Really fascinating election year dynamics at play here.

GOP has the leverage along with Manchin and Sinema.

And there are some interesting Senate seats at play, namely GA and AZ, with sitting Dems running, along with some open seats that will make the open elections for those seats that much more interesting as the campaigns message based on whatever is playing out inside the confirmation hearings on Capitol Hill with the retiring Senator for those open seats.

I don't see how Biden could possibly put up a Kagan, Breyer, or Soto type nominee, he just doesn't have the numbers or popularity.

Breyer was confirmed in the 103rd, a 53v47 Senate, the same as Ginsberg. Clinton and the Dems of the 103rd were destroyed in the 94 election.

Kagan and Soto were confirmed in the 111. The eye popping and scary 58v42 Senate, which thankfully the American voter heavily corrected in 2010 and even more in 2012.

---

I don't think these dynamics are in play here, actually.

Manchin and Sinema aren't going to block any SCOTUS nominee Biden puts up. Here's why:
1. They are still Democrats to the core, and I doubt Biden could nominate anyone so radical that they would object to.
2. The media isn't going to scandalize a Biden nominee like they did Trump's nominees, so it won't be such a political hot potato.
3. Because of #2, I just don't think this is going to get on the Give-a-Crap Radar of the average joe voter, so Manchin and Sinema will not feel like their political future is threatened if they vote to confirm.
4. The same goes for any other Senator in a potential swing state. This issue won't be one that they feel the voters will care too much about either way, because the media isn't going to make this front page news like they did with Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett.

So...Biden will make a way left liberal pick (just like Obama did with Sotomayor and Kagan) and the nomination will breeze through the Senate confirmation without breaking a sweat.

---

See post above.

And I disagree. With a 50/50 split and the dems in more conservative states and districts up for reelection, SCOTUS nominations are absolutely at play. It's why McConnell was able to do what he did in 2016 to Garland.

I wish it were not this way. It should not be this way. But the Democrats 75 year strategy of getting the courts to legislate from the bench has made this process a far bigger deal than the passage of a $1-$6 Trillion funding package.

---

I so hope you are right, I really really do. But I just don't see it happening. He's going to nominate someone radically left based on skin color and gender, and the Senate is going to confirm at record speed.

I hope I'm wrong and you are right, but I don't think I'm going to be wrong on this.

---

Perhaps, but it will cost them. I suppose they could go all in if they think they have no shot at retaining either chamber. But they aren't replacing Thomas or Alito here. Going all in on replacing Breyer with an even more radical Breyer is a risk without that big of a reward. The GOP is already able to run a national campaign in this cycle that Biden and the Dems are radicals. A radical justice right before election will only give the GOP an even stronger narrative.

Quote:

---

The Senate is split 50-50, with Vice President Kamala Harris breaking the tie. So far, so good, given past Senators have changed the rules for judicial nominees to get across the finish line with just 51 votes. The so-called nuclear option is meant as a last resort, but with the exception of Chief Justice John Roberts, none of the current conservative Justices cleared a 60-vote benchmark.

But the nuclear option can go into motion only if the Judiciary Committee reports the nomination to the floor, a procedural move that says whether a majority on the committee recommends the full Senate consider the pick. Well, in a little-noticed backroom deal that took more than a month to hammer out, McConnell and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer agreed to a power-sharing plan in February that splits committee membership, staffs and budgets in half.

Why does this matter? If all 11 Republican members of the Judiciary Committee oppose Biden's pick and all 11 Democrats back her, the nomination goes inert. (A pretty safe bet in a committee where at least half of the Republican members have White House ambitions of their own.) The nomination doesn't die, but it does get parked until a lawmakerhistorically, the Leader of the partybrings it to the floor for four hours of debate.

A majority of the Senate51 votes, typicallycan then put debate about the issue on the calendar for the next day. But that's the last easy part. When the potential pick comes to the floor again, it's not as a nomination. At that point, it's a motion to discharge, a cloture motion that requires 60 votes. In other words, 10 Republicans would have to resurrect the nomination of someone already blocked in the Judiciary Committee.

. . . .

Republicans, should they want to, can sink this nominee. And if history is predictive, that's exactly wh

---

Link