Senator Chuck Schumer is planning to stall the confirmation of Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee. Donald Trump announced Amy Coney Barrett as his pick to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. Senator Schumer is against the nomination because of the proximity to the general election in November.

Senator Doug Jones, quoted by Political, said, "We know that the votes are not there, but you do what you can to call attention to it." He is admitting that they do not have the votes to stop the confirmation. A big fight in an election year for the senators who know they will lose the confirmation vote.

They plan on stalling regardless of the upcoming elections and the results of those elections. The Democrats have agreed to play hardball with the nominating process. They will delay the proceedings by using the procedural rules of the Senate.

Democratic response to the nomination of Amy Coney Barrett

They initially called for a boycott of the confirmation hearings. This action would not stop the hearings. The Democrats have since backed off this boycott and will attend the confirmation hearings for Amy Coney Barrett.

Their objection is how Mitch McConnell blocked the nomination of Barack Obama in 2016. A similar circumstance to this year. Another Supreme Court vacancy in an election year and President Trump nominated a replacement for the Supreme Court like Obama's nomination prior.

The difference is that Republicans controlled the Senate, and the president was a Democrat in 2016. There have been nominations in the United States during election years. They confirm them when the political party is the same between the president and the Senate, although they do not confirm on the rare occasion.

When the parties are different, they vote the confirmation down.

The goal is to delay the confirmation to protect Obamacare. The Supreme Court is voting on sections of Obamacare on November 10, 2020. Some senators have also refused to meet with Amy Coney Barrett.

Senate procedures available to delay the confirmation vote on Amy Coney Barrett

The Senate has procedures that could delay the hearings. Some of these procedures are well-known, while others are obscure. Every one of these can delay the confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Senator Schumer used a little known procedure called the two-hour rule. Once invoked, the two-hour rule stops all hearings after the Senate has been in session for two hours. All businesses would stop in the confirmation hearings, which will be over two hours long.

The Democrats could slow the legislative process. The Senate has a rule if approved by every senator that they could resolve legislation without delay.

If one Democrat does not agree to the resolution, they would have to take the regular approval route.

The Senate cannot recess until every senator approves the motion. Once again, it takes one objection, and the Senate will stay in session. Without full consent, the objection will stop the Senate from any new business.

Another procedure is to call a quorum. An in-person vote in which a few Republican senators are absent could lead to a delay. The Democrats will then boycott the quorum vote, delaying procedures in the Senate.

They use a point of order for clarifying Senate procedures from the chair of the committee. Another delay tactic is a motion to adjourn. Democrats could continually use these procedures to delay the hearings, although it will not stop the hearings.

The House of Representatives could delay the hearings. The House does not have a vote on confirmations. They can introduce bills that would enable Democrats to bring them to the floor. Examples would be a War Powers Resolution or impeachment, which both are unlikely.

The last one is obvious. Present a motion to delay the final committee vote. Any senator can move to delay the committee hearing vote for a week.

Democrats pushing Amy Coney Barrett to recuse herself from hearing a case on the 2020 election

Donald Trump has stated the importance of having a ninth justice on the Supreme Court this election year. The national election in November might need the Supreme Court to decide the outcome. The ninth justice would make sure that there could not be a tie if disputed.

Senator Lindsey Graham, who leads the Senate Judiciary Committee, agrees with this hypothesis. These statements have led Democrats to doubt the objectivity of the new justice. Their opinion is that the president appointed her. How can she be unbiased?

Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont is leading this charge. Leahy is the highest-ranking Democrat on the Judiciary Committee. This argument states that the Supreme Court justices have allegiance to the president who appointed them and not the Constitution.

The Democrats know they do not have the votes to stop the confirmation. They can use procedures to delay the confirmation. The filibuster for Supreme Court nominees does not exist anymore, so it takes a simple majority to confirm.

The votes are not there, and this is strictly about power. As Politico reported, Senator Jon Tester stated, "There's no sense of fair play, it's all about power, it's all about retention of power, it's all about screwing people over." Tester is a Democrat, but this statement explains the situation.

This quote could be against both sides. For the Democrats, it could mean that they are flexing their muscles to delay the vote. The nominee is conservative and would give conservatives on the court a six to three advantage. This advantage for conservatives would lead to a loss of power for the liberals.

The Republicans have the power and are using it to their advantage. Tester is saying that power is the key and nothing else matters.

Something else matters though, other than power.

The Constitution grants the president the right to nominate a Supreme Court justice, and the Senate confirms the pick. In 2016, President Obama nominated his justice. The Republican Senate did not confirm that justice.

The story would be different if the Democrats controlled the Senate. This nomination would be like 2016 with no confirmation. After the election, the confirmation would be that scenario like Trump nominating his first Supreme Court justice in 2017.

Follow the page Donald Trump
Follow
Follow the page Democratic Party
Follow
Don't miss our page on Facebook!