[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo9

As an originalist I, of course, disagree slightly with this. I would like a 9-0 originalist court, frankly.

That said, I do agree with your position that one raw exercise of power invites the next. I would just note, however, that the Democratic Party would have the power to block and filibuster the ACB nomination right now except McConnell removed the filibuster on SCOTUS judges. He did that to make good on a promise he made to the Democrats that he would take that course of action if they used their 2011 Senate majority to remove the filibuster on Circuit and District court judges, which - despite the warning this would be the response - they did.

So, yes, we are seeing the raw exercise of power inviting the next, however, this process was set in motion - not this year - but in 2011 and by Harry Reid. In other words, were it not for an action taken by Harry Reid nine years ago, there would be no chance ACB will be confirmed the week after next as will happen.

Originally Posted by Sister Havana

Let’s remember why Reid and the Democrats changed the rules to remove the filibuster for all but Supreme Court nominations. It’s important to understand it in context. McConnell and the Republicans used the filibuster a then-unprecedented amount of times to block or stall pretty much all of Obama’s appointees. They filibustered appointees they all agreed were qualified, for no other reason than Obama was doing the appointing. They even filibustered Chuck Hagel’s nomination for Secretary of Defense - yes, that would be former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel.

The event that was really the tipping point for the rule change was when Obama nominated three judges to fill three vacant seats on the DC Circuit Court. Not only did Senate Republicans scream and yell about how Obama was court-packing (by filling existing vacancies!), but they even introduced legislation to remove those three seats from the DC Circuit so Obama could not appoint people to fill them. (It didn’t pass, obviously.) This was the climate in which the rule was changed. Harry Reid didn’t do it just for fun.

And if the filibuster hadn’t been removed during the Obama years, anyone who thinks Mitch McConnell wouldn’t have done it himself the first time Democrats tried to filibuster any of Trump’s nominees has not paid attention to Mitch McConnell.

Interestingly, I just saw this pop up tonight.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...es/3573369001/