GOP had 54-member majority in 2016, and an 11-9 majority on Judiciary Committee.
Graham/Flake woulda felt compelled to approve an Obama nom (add Hatch for Garland), and send to floor.
Kirk, Collins, Murkowski woulda added their votes to confirm.
Dems woulda turned court left.
McConnell stepped in with his made-up principle to protect his members from the consequences of their prior commitments that they themselves wanted to abandon (but on their own had no good reason to) when the balance of the Court for a generation was finally at stake.
Democrats, for their part, demanded hearings and a vote for Obama's nominee BECAUSE THEY KNEW THEY HAD THE VOTES to turn the court solidly liberal for the first time since 1969.
It's why RBG joined the #WeNeedNine bandwagon, too
The roles are reversed in 2020 because Republicans have the votes to confirm Trump's nominee to finally complete their own mission, begun in 1969, to get a solidly conservative SCOTUS majority that obviates any wobbly vote....and Democrats don't have the votes to stop it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
No, these people are pushing clearly unconstitutional/illegal policies precisely because they hope this SCOTUS will be a willing partner in their reactionary revolution or will be powerless in the face of departmentalist defiance—and if the people resist then poof go elections
These people are seeking nothing short of an FDR-style constitutional revolution but without his political mandate to override the existing order—let alone return to the one FDR’s election repudiated.
FDR was reelected by even larger margins in 1936 AFTER the old guard SCOTUS struck down his first New Deal.
Do Trump’s people actually think he’ll get the same results via an internecine war with an otherwise simpatico SCOTUS? No. Bc they don’t think they answer to the people.
Dude's deliberately misreading a very short, digestible, and temporary judicial order so to lay the groundwork for going full Jackson Apocrypha in service to his movement's authoritarian agenda.
These people are all but actually up in arms over the judge's restraining "political appointees" from accessing Treasury's payment system, and lying to you that it includes the Secretary and other cabinet members, when it's clearly aimed at people like the DOGEbros.
Could the judge have been clearer? Sure. But this is still clear to any plain reader. Could the order have been narrower? Sure, another judge approved such a deal between private plaintiffs and the admin over DOGEbro access while litigation played out: storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
Trump’s DOJ was responding to this motion from WA/AZ/IL/OR seeking a temporary restraining order against the “Citizenship Stripping Order” storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.usco…
The decision feels like Bruen in that it'll have the justices in subsequent cases going WAIT NO WE DIDN'T MEAN THAT except it'll be after Emperor Trump orders Kavanaugh to chew off Roberts's face in the supersized Thunderdome constructed on top of the Supreme Court building
Hahahaha what am I saying this opinion will never be cited again if dude returns to office because they'll just Weekend at Bentham him so that he'll remain immune from whatever crimes he commits while alive or dead during his eternal reign
If dude loses then yeah so long as this SCOTUS is similarly constituted a majority will permit any subsequent Republican DOJ to swiftly execute any past Democratic President for the nonofficial criminal acts of Winning an Election and Democrating While In Office.