Gorsich & Garland-Udall's suggestion too far fetched? nt

[duhneece]

[Lucinda]

1. Not sure what you are referring to...Hearing for both? n/t

[FBaggins]

3. Udall proposed a compromise about a month ago

Send both of them up to the Supreme Court - on the assumption that one of the other justices was planning to retire later this year. Trump would then send both Garland and Gorsuch up for a simultaneous vote.

Of course this only happens on The West Wing.

[Lucinda]

4. Thank you! I'd missed his proposal in all the chaos..

[FBaggins]

2. That depends on what you mean by "far-fetched"

It isn't unreasonable... but it also has zero chance of happening.

[TexasProgresive]

5. OPs like this make me nostalgic for "unrec"

You should always give a little info to a cryptic title. It's only fair to the rest of us. I see that others have done this but it would be nice in the OP.

[duhneece]

6. OMG you are so right

..and I was so wrong. I did that horrible thing of assuming that our senator's suggestion (and I hope to ask him today if it was said strictly tongue in cheek) could still be suggested, even if it has no chance of passing.

"...NN reports that Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) is floating a plan that would send both Judge Neil Gorsuch and Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.
His proposal is for Trump to meet privately with Supreme Court justices who are interested in retirement. If one of those justices decided they would be willing to retire, and if Trump promises to nominate Garland, President Barack Obama’s unconfirmed former SCOTUS pick, in their place, then the retiring justice would submit a letter of resignation contingent on that promise.
Then, both Garland and Gorsuch would be voted on simultaneously..."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/02/28/sen-udalls-gorsuch-garland-plan-for-the-supreme-court/?utm_term=.2395a77b388c

Yes, I know that it was a plot on West Wing, but I still think it is brilliant. My reporting is at the far end of the opposite of brilliant. I am so sorry to my DU family. That was shitty but unintentional.

[TexasProgresive]

7. Your gracious apology makes me glad there is no "unrec" Thanks

[duhneece]

9. I am so glad you called it out.

Love you madly, dearly...you help me by doing so.

[FBaggins]

8. It's still a useful story, because it points to the real battle.

For all the bluster, we knew that a Republican Senate was not going to confirm an Obama appointment unless they were certain that they would lose both the White House and Senate in November. The President only made the pick to try to pin them to that position so that it would help with the election. We all counted on a Clinton presidency and a Democratic Senate - in which case we could finally replace Ginsburg and Breyer and potentially cement a progressive court if Kennedy couldn't outlast Clinton's Presidency.

Both sides rolled the dice... and we lost. Once the race was over and we had Trump and a Republican Senate... we knew that someone like Gorsuch was on his way to replacing Scalia and the court would remain tilted to the right on most issues. Of course everyone will make noise about it... but it was locked in from that moment.

The real battle is Kennedy's replacement (which could come later this year)... or (heaven forbid) if Ginsburg/Breyer can't outlast the current balance. Few Senate Democrats are really trying to stop Gorsuch (not because they like him, but because they know they can't stop him)... they're trying to set up a scenario where they might be able to stop Gorsuch 2.0 & 3.0 later in the term.

[duhneece]

10. Thank you for understanding all of that...in spite of me.

I just love DU and am reminded of that so often.