TexasCHLforum.com

RIP Justice Scalia!

I pray the constitution doesn't die with him.

C-dub wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Any person nominated by Obama must first get out of the Senate Judiciary Committee before the Senate debates and votes. Chairman Grassley has given a strong indication his committee will not act on any nomination.

Chas.

That's similar to what I was thinking about. Hopefully, any nominee of BO's will be as successful as any of his budget proposals at getting confirmed.

There are already a number of federal appellate court judges tied up on the committee, so this won't be anything new.

Chas.

341 DTG!

We can stall and reject all we want, but Obama can make a recess appt when the current session ends.

The fact is, we cannot stop him. Elections have consequences.

If it is any consolation, no Republican was going to nominate a more conservative jurist either, so it was a losing situation no matter what. The man had no equal, though Thomas is trying.

Solaris wrote:We can stall and reject all we want, but Obama can make a recess appt when the current session ends.

The fact is, we cannot stop him. Elections have consequences.

If it is any consolation, no Republican was going to nominate a more conservative jurist either, so it was a losing situation no matter what. The man had no equal, though Thomas is trying.

That might be more difficult than you think.
http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/is-a- ... an-option/

This is both frightening and depressing at the loss of such a staunch defender of our Constitution on the SCOTUS. Prayers for his family, friends, and our Nation. I am waiting to hear what exactly was the cause of death. All I have seen referenced was natural causes.

McConnell also said the Senate will not take up or move on the nomination. I am not confident in much of what he says.

This wouldn't be his first time to use the recess appointment. Here is an interesting article with a bit of irony includes. Notice Scalia wrote a separate opinion.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/201 ... ourt-finds

Justice Antonin Scalia concurred in the judgment, but wrote a separate opinion describing recess appointments as an anachronism in an age of high-tech communication devices. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas signed on to Scalia's opinion.

Scalia’s opinion sought to further constrain executive power, saying recess appointments are only constitutional when vacancies arise during a true recess, and expressed concern about the standards set by the majority.

Here's another interesting blog post from the site jmra posted. It discusses previous election year supreme court vacancies.

http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/supre ... ion-years/

My wife and I were at the mall in Wichita Falls yesterday when I read the news. I immediately became rather upset and had a sick feeling. I told my wife we needed to leave the mall before I said something that got us thrown out. I explained it to her, though I believe she thinks I over-react to this sort of thing. I assured her this one was a very, very bad turn of events. I'm still rather saddened today, and truly worried for our future. At this point, I pray that Senator Grassley and others will hold the line, and not allow any "moderate" that is nothing of the sort to be slipped by them.

May Justice Scalia rest in peace, and my condolences to his family, and our nation.

From Ben Shapiro:

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... stitution/

For those worried about a recess appointment, it is not a permanent appointment, and will only last until the end of the next session. This means that if the President waits until congress ends its session at the end of this year, his recess appointment will last only two years at most. Additionally recess appointments do not get paid IIRC.

How can a justice of the peace declare someone dead and determine a cause of death without even seeing the body and then not order an autopsy? Just sounds fishy to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

mojo84 wrote:How can a justice of the peace declare someone dead and determine a cause of death without even seeing the body and then not order an autopsy? Just sounds fishy to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

It sounds like the first JP broke protocol and should have ordered an autopsy.
Justice Scalia was a 79 year old man who died and there is no obvious evidence of foul play.
It is sad that he died, but nothing sounds fishy to me.

WildBill wrote:

mojo84 wrote:How can a justice of the peace declare someone dead and determine a cause of death without even seeing the body and then not order an autopsy? Just sounds fishy to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

It sounds like the first JP broke protocol and should have ordered an autopsy.
Justice Scalia was a 79 year old man who died and there is no obvious evidence of foul play.
It is sad that he died, but nothing sounds fishy to me.

Ok. It does to me.

Autopsies aren't just for deaths involving foul play.

mojo84 wrote:

WildBill wrote:

mojo84 wrote:How can a justice of the peace declare someone dead and determine a cause of death without even seeing the body and then not order an autopsy? Just sounds fishy to me.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

It sounds like the first JP broke protocol and should have ordered an autopsy.
Justice Scalia was a 79 year old man who died and there is no obvious evidence of foul play.
It is sad that he died, but nothing sounds fishy to me.

Ok. It does to me.

Autopsies aren't just for deaths involving foul play.

Here are the relevant laws regarding inquests. I think there is some leeway in the term "attended by a physician" in that it doesn't specify a time frame.
In my [limited] experience a person who has been seeing a physician for some period of time who is familiar with their medical history can sign a death
certificate stating the cause of death without examining or viewing the body of the deceased.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/D ... /CR.49.htm