Sen. Dianne Feinstein's death creates a vacancy on the powerful panel that oversees President Biden's judicial nominees. Without her, Democrats don't have a majority on it.
Chuck Grassley is 90, and he was just re-elected in 2022, which means he’ll still be there when he’s 95. The life expectancy of a 90-year-old man is 3.72 years. And, thanks to Senate seniority bullshit, he’s on Judiciary.
So it is more likely than not that Grassley will keel over (or resign) before he completes his term, which means that breaking this precedent now would have almost certainly backfired on them in the next few years.
Grassley has really important things to say on Twitter like….
These cable companies are getting to big like goggle so they can ignore their customers FNC has taken their ticker off. For those of us tired of hearing the same story ten times we can mute and read. So now just turn to another channel NOT HISTORY CH
If u lost ur pet pidgin /it’s dead in front yard my Iowa farm JUST DISCOVERED here r identifiers Right leg Blue 2020/3089/AU2020/SHE ///LEFT LEG GREEN BAND NO PRINTED INFO. Sorry for bad news
And we all know the GOP would never hold a double standard on procedural precedents. That could turn into quite the slippery slope, maybe even holding up Supreme Court appointments eventually
My point is that the likelihood of the Democrats immediately turning around and using that new standard themselves is quite high here. It would be equivalent to what would happen if Thomas or Alito dies in the next few months and the Democrats promptly announce that they’re going to go ahead and confirm his replacement in an election year just like Republicans did for Ginsburg, except with the actuarial odds of a 90 year old instead of a 75 year old.
True, it’s in their interest this time. I still wouldn’t put it past them to fight Feinsteins replacement tooth and nail then act like the Dems are destroying the country by pushing back on Grassleys replacement
Chuck Grassley is 90, and he was just re-elected in 2022, which means he’ll still be there when he’s 95. The life expectancy of a 90-year-old man is 3.72 years. And, thanks to Senate seniority bullshit, he’s on Judiciary.
So it is more likely than not that Grassley will keel over (or resign) before he completes his term, which means that breaking this precedent now would have almost certainly backfired on them in the next few years.
Grassley has really important things to say on Twitter like….
(May, 2021)
Damn I’ve never seen someone live tweet brain damage
I liked this one from 2020 too,
Covfefe
And we all know the GOP would never hold a double standard on procedural precedents. That could turn into quite the slippery slope, maybe even holding up Supreme Court appointments eventually
My point is that the likelihood of the Democrats immediately turning around and using that new standard themselves is quite high here. It would be equivalent to what would happen if Thomas or Alito dies in the next few months and the Democrats promptly announce that they’re going to go ahead and confirm his replacement in an election year just like Republicans did for Ginsburg, except with the actuarial odds of a 90 year old instead of a 75 year old.
True, it’s in their interest this time. I still wouldn’t put it past them to fight Feinsteins replacement tooth and nail then act like the Dems are destroying the country by pushing back on Grassleys replacement