The Constitutional Crisis Thread

[_subgenius]

The Democrats will certainly take the bait on Gorsuch, their previous hesitations will be dismissed and he will most likely be confirmed:

*to oversimplify
Trump nominates Gorsuch
Democrats are doubtful of Gorsuch - because Trump
Trump critical of judges/courts
Gorsuch critical of Trump
Democrats see potential, moving from serious doubt to just skeptical, with Gorsuch

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-t ... eal-2015-6

[_EAllusion]

Gorsuch is going to be confirmed. There's nothing Democrats can do about it. The only question is how much of a stink they want to put up about it. There's no need for some 12-D chess-level plan to have him nominated.

[_The CCC]

Maybe not. Republicans maintained a 60 vote majority for SC nominee's. There aren't 60 votes available for Gorsuch. They could've course employ the "Nuclear Option" and confirm him with a simple majority.

[_beastie]

Trump is quickly confirming every worst fear I had about him.

Here's the key exchange, with "Face the Nation's" John Dickerson (emphasis added):

DICKERSON: When I talked to Republicans on the Hill, they wonder, what in the White House -- what have you all learned from this experience with the executive order?

MILLER: Well, I think that it's been an important reminder to all Americans that we have a judiciary that has taken far too much power and become, in many cases, a supreme branch of government. One unelected judge in Seattle cannot remake laws for the entire country. I mean this is just crazy, John, the idea that you have a judge in Seattle say that a foreign national living in Libya has an effective right to enter the United States is -- is -- is beyond anything we've ever seen before.

The end result of this, though, is that our opponents, the media and the whole world will soon see as we begin to take further actions, that the powers of the president to protect our country are very substantial and will not be questioned.

"Will not be questioned." That is an incredible claim to executive authority -- and one we can expect to hear plenty more about. Trump has beaten around this bush plenty, yes. But Miller just came out and said it: that the White House doesn't recognize judges' authority to review things such as his travel ban.

It might have been excused as a little over-exuberance, except that Miller said similar things in his other Sunday show appearances.

He said on "Meet the Press": "The bottom line is that a district judge -- a district judge in Seattle -- cannot make immigration law for the United States, cannot give foreign nationals and foreign countries rights they do not have and cannot prevent the president of the United States from suspending the admission of refugees from Syria."

And on "Fox News Sunday": "This is a judicial usurpation of the power. It is a violation of judges' proper roles in litigating disputes. We will fight it. And we will make sure that we take action to keep from happening in the future what's happened in the past."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... f1bd2c65ea

Our only hope is that mainstream republicans value our constitution and our democracy more than they value the current power they possess to enact some of their pet policy changes. Given how craven they've been in this regard throughout the election cycle, that is a very slim hope indeed.

And with the vote suppressions they have up their sleeve, soon we will all be living in the same banana republic that currently exists in North Carolina.

[_beastie]

Gorsuch is going to be confirmed. There's nothing Democrats can do about it. The only question is how much of a stink they want to put up about it. There's no need for some 12-D chess-level plan to have him nominated.

While I remain nauseated about the fact that republicans openly defiled the rights of a sitting president to appoint a supreme court judge in order to get their way, Gorsuch may be the best we can hope for with Trump.

[_subgenius]

Gorsuch is going to be confirmed. There's nothing Democrats can do about it. The only question is how much of a stink they want to put up about it. There's no need for some 12-D chess-level plan to have him nominated.

While I remain nauseated about the fact that republicans openly defiled the rights of a sitting president to appoint a supreme court judge in order to get their way, Gorsuch may be the best we can hope for with Trump.

They didn't interfere with any president’s right to nominate...just because your party can't "politic" as well as the other party doesn't many anyone was "openly (defiled) of rights".

[_Res Ipsa]

And the case grinds on. In the District Court, the States are seeking discovery on the President's intent, while the Feds are trying to put the case on hold while they decide whether to continue to defend the order or issue a new, improved version. In the 9th, briefs will be filed on the issue of whether the motion to stay the TRO should be reheard by an 11 judge panel. Meanwhile, the three-judge panel that denied the Feds' motion to stay has set a briefing schedule for the appeal of the TRO. Those briefs will be filed in March.

[_Jersey Girl]

And the case grinds on. In the District Court, the States are seeking discovery on the President's intent, while the Feds are trying to put the case on hold while they decide whether to continue to defend the order or issue a new, improved version. In the 9th, briefs will be filed on the issue of whether the motion to stay the TRO should be reheard by an 11 judge panel. Meanwhile, the three-judge panel that denied the Feds' motion to stay has set a briefing schedule for the appeal of the TRO. Those briefs will be filed in March.

So what you're saying is that while this continues on into March, the administration could develop another executive order regarding immigration/travel, launch it and hope it flies, making the original executive order pretty much a moot point?

Or am I being unrealistic? Naïve?

[_Res Ipsa]

And the case grinds on. In the District Court, the States are seeking discovery on the President's intent, while the Feds are trying to put the case on hold while they decide whether to continue to defend the order or issue a new, improved version. In the 9th, briefs will be filed on the issue of whether the motion to stay the TRO should be reheard by an 11 judge panel. Meanwhile, the three-judge panel that denied the Feds' motion to stay has set a briefing schedule for the appeal of the TRO. Those briefs will be filed in March.

So what you're saying is that while this continues on into March, the administration could develop another executive order regarding immigration/travel, launch it and hope it flies, making the original executive order pretty much a moot point?

Or am I being unrealistic? Naïve?

I think that's one of the options the White House is considering. I don't think the original executive order would be moot unless it was withdrawn or superseded.

[_Res Ipsa]

The District Courts in Washington and Virginia converted their TROs into Preliminary Injunctions. That means they are likely to stay in effect until the courts decide the merits of the cases. The Washington PI is nationwide. The Virginia PI only applies to Virginia residents.

When the federal attorney in the Washington case argued that the case should be delayed until the 9th Cir is finished, the judge referred her to Trump's "See you in court" tweet. He also said that, given the Government's argument that dangerous people might be getting into the country, he felt it important to move the case along quickly.