3 ms·
If I recall correctly, the Republicans can refuse to allow a replacement to be seated on the Judiciary committee…and they certainly will do that if they can.
by bandyaboot 3y ago
If I recall correctly, the Republicans can refuse to allow a replacement to be seated on the Judiciary committee…and they certainly will do that if they can.
- eropple 3y agoSenate business can be conducted with the VP as tiebreaker as well, as I understand it? But I could be wrong.
- alistairSH 3y agoI believe committee membership votes are currently subject to a supermajority, so filibuster rules apply. There won't be a new member seated to Judiciary without a Senate rules package. Sen. Manchin (D) likely won't allow that to happen. This means judicial nominations are effectively hamstrung for the time being.
- eropple 3y agoAh, I didn't realize that! Thank you.
- justrealist 3y agoThe Republicans can't block anything unless the democrats agree to allow it. Like yes there are a lot of self-imposed rules in the Senaate, but it's fundamentally on the Democrats that they can't pull together 51 votes to tweak the rules.
- eropple 3y ago(edit: ignore, I misread the vacancies list)
- justrealist 3y agoThat's not true, there are 50 functionally-democrat senators. There were 51 with Feinstein.
- eropple 3y agoWhoops - I was reading a list of vacancies/recent resignations and thought a House one was a Senate one as they were commingled. You're right, there are 47 Democrats and 3 Independents. Doesn't change that they won't do anything, of course. :|