From the office of U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski:
MIKULSKI CALLS ON SENATE AND PRESIDENT TO FULFILL CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO FILL VACANCY ON SUPREME COURT
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Barbara A. Mikulski (D-Md.) today issued the following statement calling on the Senate and President Obama to fulfill their Constitutional duty to fill the vacancy on the United States Supreme Court:
“Barack Obama is our President until January 20, 2017. The American people elected him to a four year term. I’m shocked that Senate Republicans are only giving him a three year term.
“President Obama has the Constitutional authority and responsibility to submit a nomination to fill the vacancy left with Justice Scalia’s passing. He has a constitutional obligation to exercise that authority.
“We must look to the Constitution and live by the Constitution. The Senate should fulfill its Constitutional duty by holding a timely hearing on the President’s nominee and a vote on the Senate floor.
“I will carefully evaluate President Obama’s nominee and render an independent judgement. My vote will reflect my commitment to core Constitutional principles.”
Me thinks Babs is stretching things here a bit–how could she possibly be “shocked” by anything Mitch McConnell and the Senate leaders say, do– or do not !
And I’m shocked that MD’ers gave you a 1 yr term, much less 25 yrs. Useless, unthinking, robotic, partisan hound dog – my apologies to hound dogs everywhere.
Shut up and retire. It can’t be soon enough. I think it’s great that the new President gets to select a judge for consideration.
Well…..Rita Lowe, you are obviously a partisan hack that believes it’s okay to ignore the constitution AND the will of the MAJORITY of the American voters! President Obama was elected TWICE by a sizable majority of the electorate, and one of his many duties is to forward nominees to the Senate for supreme court vacancies. The statements made by many Republican elected officials immediately following the death of Scalia (including ALL of the candidates for POTUS) ignore this fact, and instead endorse this B.S. idea that the Senate should wait a full year to vote on the current president’s nominee. This is not only wrong (constitutionally), it is also morally bankrupt! President Obama WILL nominate one (or more) qualified individuals to fill the vacant seat on the SCOTUS, and the position WILL be filled by a President Obama nominee (whether it’s by the normal process, OR (if necessary) by a recess appointment (just like Republican President Eisenhower did). The precedent has been set! 🙂
You forgot to mention the Dems in the same position, including Obama and Biden, responded and acted the same way you are complaining about. Were you an adamant Constitutionalist then? Obama is supposedly an expert on the Constitution, you would think he would have known better.
Pathetic whining from the left when their own actions are brought against them.
Wrong “Taxpayer”! The Democrats in the Senate have NEVER stated that they would not even consider voting on a Republican president’s SCOTUS nominee! Why must you lie in an attempt to get your point across? Yes, many Democratic Senators opposed Republican president’s SCOTUS nominees in the past (which is normal, AND it happens on both sides of the aisle), but NEVER has their been this hyper-partisan, ignore the Constitution attitude until the current situation today. This is really hard for most of you “red” folks to admit, but you are dead wrong about this. Facts are facts, and they are provable (unless you get all of your talking points from FOX NOISE).
I vote Democrat, regardless. Don’t care, I want social justice.
By the way, Im not allowed to be on my phone now but who cares? Racist Republicans going to fire me?
Being Republican and holding people accountable does not make one a racist. The philosophy of the Democratic Party is the same as ever but the players have changed. The Democratic Party in the 50s and 60s was for the average guy who did not want anything more than to better himself. He or she was not looking for a handout but was willing to work to better him or herself. Now the party has developed the image of enabling freeloaders and deadbeats. The party is being over run by people who want something and are not willing to do anything in any way to repay or compensate the provider. Just because someone is on public assistance does not mean that there is no way to repay the givers. They could keep their public housing clean and drug free, keep their kids off the street, and basically do the right thing. Those actions alone could be a repayment to the government. The Democratic Party gives and gives but will never attempt to hold people accountable. Why is this so? Kennedy was the big Democrat who said ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country. Sorry to tell you there Democrats but you ain’t, following his words.
Definitely off on a tangent that has nothing to do with the topic of Supreme Court justices.
Was only responding to the ignorance displayed by someone identifying themselves as Public School Teache. It is no wonder the country is in the shape it is with educators the likes of same.
I long for the day ALL guns are banned and the 2nd Amendment is deleted from our Constitution.
I’m also an advocate for prosecution of individuals who use hurtful words, our state should really be on the front line for this social justice.
Public School Teacher is advocating for the pussification of America. What kind of person would be against both the 2nd and the 1st amendments.
Why do you need a gun? No reason at all.
I’m just so glad the average person can’t lawfully carry a gun in this state.
The Constitution, Article 2, Section 2, paragraph 2, states, “He [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, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.”
The Senate must consent to a nomination by the President in order for the person to be appointed. There is nothing regarding how the consent is to be, or not be, given. If the Senate chooses to not do anything, then consent is not given. The Senate, by not holding a hearing, is not in violation of the Constitution. Sorry, Senator Mikulski, and anyone else who thinks the Senate is wrong, but you are incorrect. The Senate is within their power to not hold a hearing on any person the President may choose to nominate.
Furthermore, yes, the US elected President Obama twice. However, the senators were also elected. The President’s duty is to nominate. He should do his duty. The Senate should offer advice and consent to the nominee if the nominee is what the Senate believes to be in the best interest of the American people.
Gotta love these checks and balances.
Democratic Voter, the only reason necessary is because the Constitution grants me such power. You are actually incorrect in your statement. The average person in Maryland CAN lawfully carry a “gun” in this state, depending upon numerous factors.
Oh yeah, Paul DJ man. You got me.
I love this May Issue State, keeps people like you from desperately waiting to carry a gun.
I was wrong, unless you’re a correctional officer off duty, security guard to and from work or someone who gets a “restriction” to only carry to and from the bank as a business or a contractor/real estate/whoever who gets to carry their worthless gun during their job.
Hyuck hyuck.
Democratic Voter,
I am not DJ.
There are more “guns” besides hand guns. So, yes, you were wrong.
Oh, have a nice day.
What are you talking about bro? “More guns than handguns” WTF?
You can’t even carry a long arm. I bet you’ll be wearing metal bracelets the ment you do. LOL!!
‘Dangerous weapon’ charges et al.
Maryland is NOT a gun friendly state and WILL NEVER BE.
We have it right.
Democratic Voter,
You can’t carry a long arm in Maryland? Maryland criminalizes hunting?
In Maryland, a person may carry a long arm.
Senator Joe Biden in 1992: “President Bush should consider following the practice of the majority of his predecessors and not, and not, name a nominee until after the November election is completed.” Full video here: http://cs.pn/1QxqVjF
Dave- Biden made the statement based on a judge retiring. Judges like to retire when their party is in power. Scalia died, stop watching fox news.
Has nothing to do with engaged in hunting. That’s a lawful activity outlined in COMAR.
You can carry a handgun in an “informal target shoot” as to say on your grand papies farm.
I’m talking second amendment activist carrying a long arm for self protection in public.
Which law specifically denies you the right to carry a long arm in Maryland?
There is no law prohibiting the carry of a long arm on a person in Maryland
But I’m sure you won’t be doing it.
This is not constitutionally wrong. The constitution simply gives the president power/duty to make a nomination, but it does not give him a right to have his nominee confirmed or even considered. That is the prerogative of the senate. In addition, the Constitution DOES NOT specify the number of justices.
Congress would have to pass legislation that changed the number, which has happened in the past but will not happen now as it would be vetoed. I don’t like the president is not a good enough reason to change the number of justices.
Correct, BUT there is no constitutional obligation to hold a confirmation hearing if a nominee is picked by the president.
The precedent in an election year is to wait until after the election. This has been done by Democratic and Republican Congresses. It just doesn’t fit the liberal narrative at this time.
Well if it doesn’t please the Liberals then it must be wrong. A bunch of little toddlers throwing a tantrum because they aren’t going to get their way. Too bad.
Send in the clown and give him/her the middle bork.
Same argument, WTF. PROBLEM is that the republicans are following the “Biden Rule” when Joe stated that no president should be allowed to send up a nomination during the lame duck year. 1992, check it out. Oh yeah Harry the read also invoked the same argument against Bush. Now who’s being partisan. God but truth hurts.
You r right and there is no such thing as rigged elections..ha..one big joke on the American people…wake up people..wake up.
I’m sure you will feel the same way if Hillary or Bernie is elected? What then? Wait another 4 years? With Trump as a nominee it could very well happen.
So much for the Constitution, in MARYLAND the average person can’t carry a gun in this state without restrictions on their carry permit.
Admit the defeat.
Not correct, unless you are referring specifically to a hand gun.
So you’re going to carry your papa’s shotgun in public?
I’d love to see this.
Can a person carry a shot gun or rifle while hunting?
Of course. That’s a lawful activity where permitted in Natrual resource regulations.
You will not be carrying your grand Dada shotty while you walk around in Public, otherwise not hunting. LOL
Paul, no comment? You think I’m uneducated, like the Republicans?
I’m a Democrat, and in Maryland.
You can’t “troll” or “bait” me. I’m well aware there is no prohibiting law for carry of a long arm by a non prohibited person in Maryland last time I looked in COMAR.
I’m sure you know, by what I said EARLIER that MARYLAND is NOT a gun FRIENDLY state, as it should BE.
Well actually Maryland is very gun friendly to criminals, drug dealers, gang members, et al. It’s just the non-criminals that have a hard time getting one. Not impossible but difficult.
Before all of you who want to make guns even more difficult to get continue to preach, first get the ILLEGAL guns off the street then come back and let’s talk.
Here is the deal – the police and the courts working together have not been able to reduce the number of illegal guns and they already have some of the strictest gun laws in the nation on their side. Why don’t we start there?
Snnzzzzz….. must be a gender thing
Democratic Voter,
There was no comment because you agreed with me. There is no law against carrying a long arm in Maryland. Nothing more needs to be said. I was right, like always.
Have a nice day.
But why aren’t you out carrying your shotgun in public? It’s not against the law.
Lol, Democratic Voter is trolling me.
Wow. Only on The Dagger will a discussion on SCOTUS appointments devolve into a debate carry laws in Maryland.
Dave,
Don’t confuse them with factual quotes from Democrats like Biden and others who have said similar things They are already confused because they aren’t going to get their way.
barry soetoro is getting trumped by the same tactics they have used for years
gotta love it
go work on your putts you putz
we’ll take it from here…………. you’ve done enough damage
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/02/22/scalia-silence-of-the-lambs/
I feel the Senate should consider anyone he nominates, but should “Bork” anyone who is automatically pro abortion or against freedom of religion. (Borking was invented by Ted Kennedy (D).)