Fascist Ted Cruz introduces bill to block US #SupremeCourt expansion
Texas senator claims court dominated 6-3 by conservatives after ruthless GOP power plays must remain ‘independent’ #SCOTUS
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2023/mar/23/republican-ted-cruz-supreme-court-expansion-bill
Ruthless GOP power plays? Democrats' strategic missteps shaped the court today.
From RBG's strategic retirement plan through Obama's insistence on nominating Garland, who could not pass confirmation, the ball was in their court, and we need to hold those people accountable for their errors.
Anyway, blocking future expansion also protects the Court from legislative interference once the pendulum has swung the other way.
That's the advantage of it being a constitutional amendment and not a simple law.
@volkris @GottaLaff Obama picked Garland, a centrist, because Orrin Hatch said he would support him. McConnell decided to deny Obama any seat. Garland would have won nomination with bipartisan support if McConnell hadn't blocked any action. The only way Obama would have been allowed to nominate anyone is if he let the GOP choose the person.
Under Senate rules it's not up to any one senator, not even the Majority Leader, as to whether a nominee would be confirmed or not. The entire Senate has a say.
IF the Senate actually supported the nominee they could have brought a motion to the floor and got on with it. That they didn't shows that they didn't actually support him.
We really need to call these politicians out when they point fingers and try to shift blame to high profile figures for things that are within their own power.
But regardless, it's the president's responsibility to find a nominee that the Senate will approve. We need to remember that it was Obama's failure, as per the way the system is set up.
We've seen GOP senators defy leadership plenty, much to the consternation of Republicans through the country.
From John McCain through Mitt Romney, even recent history has examples debunking the narrative of GOP congresspeople being particularly loyal... or organized.
So the story that senators stand with leadership is a pretty weak one. Like you said, they'd only have needed to sway a few.
Regardless, though, Obama ceded his opportunity to appoint a Supreme Court justice as he voluntarily chose to press the Garland nomination even after it was clearly dead in the water.
@volkris @GottaLaff At the time the Republicans had a majority and they would need at least a few that were willing to defy the leader. There is no one that Obama could have nominated that that Senate would approve who wouldn't have been horrific. They had their sights set in repealing Roe v Wade and no pro choice candidate could have been confirmed.