https://www.politico.com/news/2023/04/17/dianne-feinstein-judiciary-committee-00092360

quote borrowed from elsewhere:



Senate's resident 90 year old dinosaur has finally shown her advanced near death age so much that her own party is calling for her to be replaced. It's been a known secret that she's been a rubber stamp for her DNC appointed staff for years, she shows up just to vote and her office does all the actual work. Well recently she's had a hard time even showing up, SAD!

Now the GOP will block her replacement from sitting on the key judiciary committee in an attempt to block Biden appointments. we've had dirty pool when it comes to forcing a no-vote, but this seems far worse. if we're getting into the business of blocking replacements to block appointments this cant lead anywhere good.

What is the point of holding up the process? I don’t see the reason here. Best case scenario the people of California choose a replacement instead? It is going to be a blue rubberstamp either way.

Who is responsible ?

cheap optics win, it's a shame we live in an era where everyone agrees something is petty but 50% of people love it, no matter what it is.

I am not confident of the issue at hand, can you clarify?

Is this a case of a seat on some committee, where the likely scenario is it will go to a democrat, but the republicans' are delaying it in the hopes that a republican president will be able to install a republican member ? is that what this is ? or what is it ?

just trying to understand the issue at hand clearly.

it's highly unlikely IMO that they'd be able to delay long enough for the 2024 election. maybe impossible.

what they're doing is pretty simple, rather than letting the democrats pick a temporary replacement to start voting on judicial appointments right away (and thus let the committee fulfill it's purpose), they're blocking it which will likely force a public discussion on who will be the replacement. so they can both criticize potential appointments, and also bring attention to democrats appointing judges because it can be used later in elections as political ammo.

it's basically a very temporary slowdown of the process to gain some cheap political gains and bring attention to a committee which doesnt traditionally have enough sex appeal to be noticed. right now judges are more visible at all levels than i ever remember before.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 18 2023 09:33am

2024 is only next year. thats not too far away.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/18/politics/merrick-garland-senate-republicans-timeline/index.html

that was 11 months ? so well there is a precedent, or do you think that they this is a more important/critical commitee and therefore it cant be delayed that long?

This post was edited by ferdia on Apr 18 2023 09:40am

2024 is next year, the election is in the fall, the winning president doesnt take office until the following january. (remember jan 6th riots on the day of the vote certification).

this isn't a move that's designed to last almost 2 years.

i edited my above. well, time will tell i guess.

i dont believe that the republican members of the committee have any real powers to delay. they're the minority party in the senate, and the minority on the committee itself.

from what i can see their only power is to stop the Dem senate majority leader (Schumer) from unilaterally appointing a replacement. which forces an open discussion on the senate floor, which will be timed and moderated by Schumer (afaik) and/or the Judiciary committee chair (a democrat). then a vote happens, and they lose any vote.

think of it like a formula 1 race, all cars except 1 get into a massive wreck. only 1 car left operational. 20 laps remain. and the officials say "u have to do the 20 laps, even though you're the last car".

This post was edited by thesnipa on Apr 18 2023 09:51am