Scalia found dead at West Texas Ranch

[celedhring]

Looks like Obama will move and name a successor right away.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/us/politics/obama-to-nominate-scalia-successor-over-republicans-objections.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=ts-item%201_of_4&module=span-abc-region&region=span-abc-region&WT.nav=span-abc-region

[celedhring]

Lots of my liberal Facebook friends are trolling with the possibility of an upcoming Democrat president nominating Obama. Just for fun's sake, is there precedent of a president sitting in the Supreme Court?

[Eddie Teach]

Taft was Chief Justice.

[Tonitrus]

Taft was Chief Justice.

And then eaten by wolves.

[Ideologue]

Surprised Clarence Thomas didn't die too.  Must be his first dissent from Scalia since '94.

Lots of my liberal Facebook friends are trolling with the possibility of an upcoming Democrat president nominating Obama. Just for fun's sake, is there precedent of a president sitting in the Supreme Court?

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

I'd thought that this was basically a good thing--Scalia wasn't like Kennedy, he was basically evil and if his dissents had held sway, America would be even worse--but someone mentioned upthread that this could motivate "light" Republicans, disaffected with whoever ends up being the nominee (the frontrunners being viscerally abominable in some way or another, like Lovecraftian beasts, rather than merely diabolical, like the conventional Christian Satan upon which most respectable Republican politicians are based).  That's kind of bad news, though it fortunately cuts both ways and motivates Democrats (and centrists who disliked Scalia's social conservatism and general shittiness) to vote too.

The further bad, but not as bad, news is that if the Senate stays Republican, as it possibly (likely?) will, but the Presidency goes to Sanders or Clinton, then there's a potential for a eight-person court for three or five more years.  I suggest this isn't as ridiculous as it sounds on its face, because few individual Republican senators will face a backlash for not confirming but may fear being primaried if they did confirm.  The upside of this is that a 4-4 split results in the affirmation of the lower courts' decision, and the circuits lean lefter, to the best of my knowledge.

There's also the possibility of one of the liberals dying, evening out the balance, and at that point a de facto 7-person court for years and years isn't impossible, leaving us in the same situation as before, only without Scalia's injection of color into the right wing of the court's depredations upon the American people.

[Ideologue]

The country needs a transgendered justice.

You know, you just used to be an economic conservative.

[garbon]

Surprised Clarence Thomas didn't die too.  Must be his first dissent from Scalia since '94.

Lots of my liberal Facebook friends are trolling with the possibility of an upcoming Democrat president nominating Obama. Just for fun's sake, is there precedent of a president sitting in the Supreme Court?

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

I'd thought that this was basically a good thing--Scalia wasn't like Kennedy, he was basically evil and if his dissents had held sway, America would be even worse--but someone mentioned upthread that this could motivate "light" Republicans, disaffected with whoever ends up being the nominee (the frontrunners being viscerally abominable in some way or another, like Lovecraftian beasts, rather than merely diabolical, like the conventional Christian Satan upon which most respectable Republican politicians are based).  That's kind of bad news, though it fortunately cuts both ways and motivates Democrats (and centrists who disliked Scalia's social conservatism and general shittiness) to vote too.

The further bad, but not as bad, news is that if the Senate stays Republican, as it possibly (likely?) will, but the Presidency goes to Sanders or Clinton, then there's a potential for a eight-person court for three or five more years.  I suggest this isn't as ridiculous as it sounds on its face, because few individual Republican senators will face a backlash for not confirming but may fear being primaried if they did confirm.  The upside of this is that a 4-4 split results in the affirmation of the lower courts' decision, and the circuits lean lefter, to the best of my knowledge.

There's also the possibility of one of the liberals dying, evening out the balance, and at that point a de facto 7-person court for years and years isn't impossible, leaving us in the same situation as before, only without Scalia's injection of color into the right wing of the court's depredations upon the American people.

I think we have enough eeyores on this board already. Am I right?

[celedhring]

It is trolling because no Democrat president would waste political capital trying to shove Justice Obama down a Republican Senate's throat.

18 months ago the Democrat establishment was all "we don't really like Obama anyway", for the midterms too.

[Josquius]

It would be glorious to see justice Obama tried. Just for the rage of the right and their cries of "OMG he is trying to keep power! Evik commie nazi jew Muslim terrorist! "

[grumbler]

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

He's as qualified as any random politician you could name.  I mean, there are no qualifications, so everybody is qualified.  Obama is as ready to be a SC Justice in 2016 as he was to be president in 2008.  Which is to say, not much at all.

[celedhring]

It would be glorious to see justice Obama tried. Just for the rage of the right and their cries of "OMG he is trying to keep power! Evik commie nazi jew Muslim terrorist! "

While I would enjoy that greatly, "what pisses the other side the most" isn't usually the most desirable policy guide.

[Jaron]

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

He's as qualified as any random politician you could name.  I mean, there are no qualifications, so everybody is qualified.  Obama is as ready to be a SC Justice in 2016 as he was to be president in 2008.  Which is to say, not much at all.

[grumbler]

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

He's as qualified as any random politician you could name.  I mean, there are no qualifications, so everybody is qualified.  Obama is as ready to be a SC Justice in 2016 as he was to be president in 2008.  Which is to say, not much at all.

  One doesn't have to even ever have attended a law school (or any other school, for that matter) to become a Justice of the USSC.  One doesn't even need to be a citizen, or even an adult.  There are no stated qualifications whatsoever.

[Martinus]

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

He's as qualified as any random politician you could name.  I mean, there are no qualifications, so everybody is qualified.  Obama is as ready to be a SC Justice in 2016 as he was to be president in 2008.  Which is to say, not much at all.

  One doesn't have to even ever have attended a law school (or any other school, for that matter) to become a Justice of the USSC.  One doesn't even need to be a citizen, or even an adult.  There are no stated qualifications whatsoever.

*ponders a new career move* 

[Tonitrus]

Dunno how that constitutes trolling.  He's certainly qualified, and as folks have mentioned, Taft served.

He's as qualified as any random politician you could name.  I mean, there are no qualifications, so everybody is qualified.  Obama is as ready to be a SC Justice in 2016 as he was to be president in 2008.  Which is to say, not much at all.

  One doesn't have to even ever have attended a law school (or any other school, for that matter) to become a Justice of the USSC.  One doesn't even need to be a citizen, or even an adult.  There are no stated qualifications whatsoever.

So even Ide could be a SC Justice! 

(sorry Ide, couldn't resist)