ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

Republicans Looking to Invoke 'LBJ Precedent' to Stop Obama Court Pick

By: John Gizzi

The tragic death Saturday of Justice Antonin Scalia means President Obama — with less than a year in office to go — has suddenly been presented the opportunity to change the direction of the U.S. Supreme Court.

As a result, talk is already mounting among conservative court-watchers that Senate Republicans should invoke what is known as the “LBJ precedent” of 1968.

In June of that year, when Chief Justice Earl Warren announced his retirement, President Lyndon Johnson nominated Associate Justice Abe Fortas to succeed him and Federal Judge Homer Thornberry to succeed Fortas.

“At age 58, Fortas, one of Johnson’s oldest and closest advisers, could be counted on to give the court democratic leadership far into the future, even if Republicans regained the presidency in 1968, as seemed likely,” reported the late columnists Rowland Evans and Robert Novak.

A combination of Republican and conservative Democratic senators charged that, with barely seven months left to his term, it was unfair for the lame duck President to make such a crucial appointment.

Led by the late Sen. Robert Griffin (R.-Mich.), Fortas opponents of both parties maintained a filibuster. Fortas eventually withdrew his nomination and the next President, Republican Richard Nixon, named Warren Burger the new chief justice to succeed Warren in 1969.

Fortas’ succession to Warren would have maintained liberal domination of the court in 1968.

Scalia’s death means the stakes today are much higher. An Obama-annointed heir to Scalia would mean nothing less than a flip of the court from left to right.

Throughout Obama’s seven years in the White House, the high court has been considered split 4-to-4 between strict constructionist (or conservative) justices and those jurists who embrace a more liberal interpretation of the Constitution.

The remaining justice, Reagan appointee Anthony Kennedy, is in many cases the “swing vote” on key cases before the court.

Were the Senate to confirm a liberal Obama nominee in the mold of his two previous justices (Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor) to succeed the scholarly constructionist Scalia, Kennedy the court would almost surely swing to a liberal panel by 5-to-3 (with Kennedy in the middle, but no longer the “swing vote”).

Such a “sea change” would come as the Supreme Court is poised to rule on such key legal cases dealing with the President’s controversial executive order on immigration (U.S. v. Texas) and the use of union dues for political purposes (Friedrichs v. CTA, et. al.).

Whether Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R.-Ky.) and his fellow GOP senators in the majority invoke the “LBJ precedent” will be a defining moment for the Republican Party in the Senate this year.

jasfourth401

If the president nominates Sri Srinavasan, previously approved by a 97 - 0 vote in the senate, then it would be almost impossible to delay the vote to approve without a major backlash. McConnell may have just boxed himself into a corner.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/05/23/sri-srinivasan-judge-supreme-court-circuit-dc-obama-bush/2351543/

Airforceone

Sorry not the way the government works. I am sure that the GOP will start with there hypocritical BS again because that's why they are a bunch of hypocrites, but just look at the year Kennedy got confirmed to the SCOTUS. So let's stop the BS and give Obama his appointment.

RJohnson

Politics aside, look for another Jew to be appointed. With three Jews already on the court another would pretty much ensure ethnic control of the court.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

Since you mentioned Kennedy's confirmation by the SCOTUS, yes, let's look at the way the Democrats blocked Bork before the Republicans got around to Kennedy.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

OMG, Not the JOOOS! We sure wouldn't want THEM in control, now would we? Yeah, we know how Obama just loves them JOOOS!

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

The Republicans hold all the cards right now. They control the Senate and all they have to do to block a nomination is to get 41 votes against him. That shouldn't be too hard.

missinglink Loc: Tralfamadore

It's not B.S. It's the countries future for the next 30 years.
If anyone needs to knock of the B.S. it's you who are feeble brained.

Which ever way it goes, if this process is circumvented it's over for our nation. A coup d'état by Obama and his minions
would be the last straw.

Let the process begin unobstructed.

missinglink Loc: Tralfamadore

Das funny

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

And unobstructed includes by Republicans. The last thing we need is another Justice Sotomayor or Kagen. And thanks for that video.

missinglink Loc: Tralfamadore

Yup
Unobstructed means a block by congress. Both houses are under Republican control voted in by we the people. It had better do our bidding on this one or it's over for our Republic.
Which ever side you are behind this had better happen.

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

I'm feeling optimistic about this one. No matter how much the Democrats whine about how the Republicans are shirking their constitutional duty (which is questionable to begin with, although we're already seeing that meme on other forums), the Republicans are holding the cards with 54 senators and the filibuster rule in place. I can't see any way the Democrats will peel off 14 Republicans to get a nomination confirmed before the end of Obama's term.

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

turdboy: Your shitting hypocritical politics again....nothing unsual coming from your septic hole!

PoppaGringo Loc: Muslim City, Mexifornia, B.R.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :thumbup:

LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA

You have to reveal these guys for the idiots that they are. It works better than just getting mad at them.