I read the constitution + federal laws, could not find anywhere that appointing a SCOTUS in election year to be illegal, why the fuss?

25 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago
    Favourite answer

    you are correct that the current president can nominate anyone for the seat, its legal & constitutional. 

    The "fuss" is all politics. 

    Back in 1992 old Joe Biden said, "it is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed."  (now called the "Biden Rule")  

    old Joe Biden in 2016 and 0bama wanted to appoint a Supreme Court Justice, "Article Two of the constitution clearly states whenever there is a vacancy in one of the court’s created by the constitution itself the Supreme Court of the United States, the President shall, not may, the President shall appoint someone to fill the vacancy with the advice and consent of the United States Senate."  (and Joe disavowed any "Biden Rule")

    And old Joe now in 2020 is saying, "Let me be clear: The voters should pick a President, and that President should select a successor to Justice Ginsburg." 

    If anything is true, its that old Joe Biden & his opinions are merely a leaf in the political wind, moving whatever direction works for him.     

  • 1 month ago

    IF THE DEMOCRATS WERE IN THE SAME POSITION THEY WOULD BE DOING THE EXACT SAME THING AND THE REPUBLICANS WOULD BE COMPLAINING

  • 1 month ago

    Why the fuss?  Well the Democrats do not want Trump to select a conservative individual for SCOTUS as the Dems want all of the control. It is pretty obvious to me, anyway.

  • 1 month ago

    the HARRY REED rule for obama in place and the NOW the Democrats do not like it -- Harry Reed put this Senate Rule in place " In November 2013, Senate Democrats led by Harry Reid used the nuclear option to eliminate the 60-vote rule on executive branch nominations and federal judicial appointments," 

    now the republican will use it and the same people who made the rule are against the rule 

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg had the option to retire and allow Obama to appoint her replacement then but choose to stay out of ego.. this is a result of poor planning and lack of team work -- Ginsburg like everyone was convince Hilary Clinton had the election sewed up and when she lost,,, the plan fell apart 

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 1 month ago

    Because you people made a fuss over Kavanaugh 

  • L
    Lv 5
    1 month ago

    First of all, thank you for doing your research!  Nearly EVERY ex-President has appointed a SCOTUS in an election year.  DIM WITS are only complaining because they think Biden will win and then they can appoint a brain dead, Liberal, Left Democrat for the position.

  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Laughable - you read the entire Constitution and ALL Federal laws and came up with this conclusion?  Somehow I don't believe you.  You could have simply asked me.

    The fuss is called "stacking the Jury."  The next President, Trump or otherwise, will work with the new Supreme Court Justice.  Therefore, that person should make the selection.

    How long did it take you to read all Federal laws?

  • Foofa
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    The "fuss" is because in the waning days of the Obama administration Justice Antonin Scalia died and Senate leader Mitch McConnell refused to give Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, a confirmation hearing. His reasoning was that SCOTUS Justices shouldn't be appointed during an election year. So this is an election year, the election now is much closer than it was when Scalia passed away (which was in a February, a full eight months before the election) and all eyes are on McConnell to see if he's going to be consistent with what he said in 2016. The only possible stance he could take if he grants a confirmation hearing to Trump's pick would be that in 2016 Obama was termed out while there's still a chance Trump will be reelected. But for a lot of people it'll seem hypocritical if McConnell allows a confirmation hearing this close to an election. 

  • 1 month ago

    As usual it is the Democratic Media News calling it hypocritical for McConnell to  push through a Conservative Justice for the Supreme Court.

    Why is our News Media dividing our nation?  This is not unConstitutional and Mitch McConnell has every right to push through a Conservative Justice.  The Republican party has been blessed with this opportunity.  Look for Nancy Pelosi to impeach President Trump again to try to stop this.  Our Congress must go.  This is the worst Congress in American history.  Nancy Pelosi is the worst Speaker of the House that we've ever had.

  • Frank
    Lv 7
    1 month ago

    RBG was fine with it, too. 

    Attachment image
  • Anonymous
    1 month ago

    Liberals have something else to cry about, ignore them.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.