Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Reject President Obama’s Supreme Court Nominee (petition)
Christian Action Network, Change.org ^ | 2/22/2016 | CAN

Posted on 02/24/2016 7:15:21 AM PST by hemogoblin

The sudden death of conservative Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has added new, crisis-level urgency to an already tense presidential race.

Almost as quickly as he announced that he will not attend Justice Scalia's funeral, Obama declared that he will, as a lame-duck president, nominate Scalia's replacement. If his appointments of justices Elena Kagan and Sonya Sotomayor are any guide, he will base his appointment on gender, ethnicity, and most of all on dependable liberalism.

Obama's nominee is highly unlikely to be a supporter of free speech, free markets, religious freedom, gun rights, strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, family values and personal responsibility, all of which Obama and his allies have worked feverishly to dismantle since 2008, with varying degrees of success.

Since the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary must confirm the president's Supreme Court nominee, we hereby call upon the Senate to reject the president's appointment -- whatever his or her record and qualifications -- and hand the appointment over to the next president, to be decided in the 2016 presidential election.

Please sign this petition, which will be sent to U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, to assert that it is the American people -- not a radical leftist president finishing off the second of two contentious, misstep-plagued terms in office -- who should determine the character of the Supreme Court going forward.


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 114th; bhoscotus; court; scalia; scotus; supreme
Started this two days ago on change.org. I think Twitter is throttling us. Anyway, please add your voices to the chorus ...
1 posted on 02/24/2016 7:15:22 AM PST by hemogoblin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: hemogoblin
Chuck Grassley and the Senate GOP sent a letter to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell indicating that they will exercise their constitutional authority to withhold consent of a Supreme Court nomination and will not hold hearings on a Supreme Court nominee until the next President is sworn in. There will be No hearings on Obama Supreme Court nominee. (FR posted by iowamark)

GOP Senators Say They Won't Even Meet With An Obama
USSC Nominee....adding that it would serve no useful purpose

==============================================

It has also been reported that Judiciary Committee Chair Sen. Chuck Grassley has decided to invoke the "Biden Rules," WRT Senate hearings on a possible Obama USSC nomination.

SOURCE: Audio sound bite number six: June 25, 1992, on the Senate floor. Senator Biden says President George H. W. Bush should not appoint a Supreme Court justice in an election year.

BIDEN: It is my view that if president Bush goes the way of Presidents Fillmore and [Andrew] Johnson and presses an election-year nomination, the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.

It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway -- and it is -- action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee and essential to the process. Otherwise it seems to me, Mr. President, we will be in deep trouble as an institution. END BIDEN QUOTE

2 posted on 02/24/2016 7:54:52 AM PST by Liz (SAFE PLACE? A liberal's mind. Nothing's there. Nothing can penetrate it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hemogoblin

Silly.

The President has every Constitutional right, and arguably the Constitutional responsibility to nominate whoever they want.

the Senate has every constitutional right to reject anyone the President nominates.

This entire situation was quite well prepared for in our founding documents, petitions and posturing such as this only inflame and unite the other side, just as they would if the parties were reversed.

The Senate should have just quietly reached this consensus and then *appeared* to go along and seriously consider, in statesmanlike fashion whoever is nominated, without all this weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth.


3 posted on 02/24/2016 7:57:50 AM PST by RedStateRocker (Better questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson