(01-27-2022 01:32 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-27-2022 01:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-26-2022 08:49 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Are we arguing now that Presidents don’t effectively have the right to appointment Justices? That it is the majority in the Senate that does?

The President has the right to NOMINATE Justices. The Senate has the right to approve or disapprove his nominations. Learned that in high school.

I think the attitude of Lad is summed up in these words of his:

"If they do not obstruct at all ..., then no need to pack the Court."

I. E., rubberstamp our choices or we will pack the Court and force our will on you.

I think the adversarial aspect ratcheted up with the passage of RVW, and the subsequent efforts of the Dems to protect it. What is the big question they ask Republican nominees? Will you uphold RVW? That is when it got partisan and adversarial - and it was the Dems who made RVW purity the cornerstone of any appointment.

Quote:[The president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States…