Citizens Dedicated To Preserving Our Constitutional Republic

What would SCOTUS 4-4 ties mean to America?

Source; http://www.vox.com/2016/2/13/10987116/scalia-supreme-court-tie?ref=yfp

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Antonin Scalia's sudden death means a plethora of potential problems for the Conservatives and Republicans. Although Mitch McConnell says the Senate will not confirm any of Obama's nominations to the Supreme Court whom ever they might be. How long until Mitch and the rest sell out like they did on Obama's other nominations they had until now been blocking? We now have a evenly divided Court, and that will most probably show as a tie on any and all cases that come before it. Most uninformed people would think that would be a good thing and deadlock any decision. However the real problem is when there is a tie, the lower courts decision is upheld with no precedent set. Look at the controversial cases that are on the Court's docket and decide how they will affect our future. Here's what could happen if there is a tie in all of these.

Whole Women's Health v. Cole: A challenge to the Texas law that has closed about half of the state's abortion clinics since 2013, and the first major abortion case in nearly a decade. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled largely in favor of the law, meaning a tie would leave it in place without setting a new precedent on abortion.
US v. Texas: The challenge to President Obama's 2014 executive action on immigration, which would protect about 4 million people — including unauthorized immigrants who'd come to the US as children and are now older than 30, as well as some parents of US citizens or permanent residents — from deportation. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the Obama administration in November; a tie would uphold that decision.
Evenwel v. Abbott: A case considering whether all residents or only eligible voters should be counted when drawing state legislative districts. Counting those who are not eligible to vote — convicted felons, immigrants who are not citizens, and children, among others — generally helps Democrats; not counting those people would give a bigger voice to white and rural voters. The lower court, the US District Court for the western district of Texas, held that everyone should be counted; a tie would uphold that.
Friedrichs v. California Teachers Association: A case challenging whether public employees who are not members of a union can be required to pay an "agency fee" or "fair share fee" to cover the cost of collective bargaining for the contract that also applies to them. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against the California nonunion teachers who argued they should not have to pay, but they did so for the case to be appealed to the Supreme Court, which would have to overturn a precedent to find in the nonunion teachers' favor.
Zubik v. Burwell: A challenge to the Obama administration's accommodation for religious nonprofits who object to being required to offer health insurance covering birth control. (The nonprofits themselves are not required to pay for the coverage, but they must submit a form so that the insurers themselves will do so.) The Third Circuit Court of Appeals found the accommodation is not a burden on religious freedom.
Fisher v. Texas: A challenge to Texas' use of affirmative action in admissions that the court has already decided once before, in 2013, and sent back to a lower court. Justice Elena Kagan has recused herself because she dealt with the case as solicitor general, meaning only seven justices will be voting on the final opinion and a tie is not possible. Anthony Kennedy is the swing vote, with the decision likely to be 4-3.

The iconic conservative justice has passed away, creating an unexpected vacancy.

Republican candidates really don't want President Obama to nominate...

None of the presidential candidates seemed to believe that an Obama nominee should ultimately wind up on the high court.

Who will Obama choose to replace Antonin Scalia? Here are 7 of the ...

Place your bets now.

Read: President Obama vows to nominate replacement to Justice Scalia

Republicans have said the Supreme Court seat should not be filled until after the upcoming presidential election.

Antonin Scalia routinely ruled against gay rights. Those opinions e...

How Scalia's opinions on gay rights explain the former Supreme Court justice.

Hillary Clinton: GOP calls to leave Scalia's seat vacant "dishonor ...

"the Senate has a constitutional responsibility here that it cannot abdicate."

Replacing Antonin Scalia will be a profound test of the American po...

Can America’s political system work amidst divided government?

Antonin Scalia's death makes the 2016 election a referendum on the ...

With Scalia's death, the stakes are bigger than ever.

Mitch McConnell has no intention of letting Obama replace Scalia

The Senate's top Republican: "this vacancy should not be filled" until 2017. The Senate's top Democrat: that's "shameful."

Antonin Scalia’s death could lead to more 4-4 ties. Here’s what hap...

Some of the biggest cases of the term could be affected.

Scalia’s death comes just a month before the court’s biggest aborti...

The Court will rule on a controversial Texas law that clinics say has forced many of them to shutter.

Ted Cruz and other conservatives are arguing Obama shouldn't get to...

The stage is set for a constitutional crisis.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is dead

The conservative stalwart has passed at age 79.

The Senate is up for grabs in 2016. What that means for the Supreme...

13 updates to this stream since February 13, 2016

Finally I have an important Question for everyone.

Considering all of the above issues;

"Ask yourself how many of these cases that will invariably now be heard will be useful in promoting Obama's agenda on immigration and voting rights? Which ones will skew the agendas in the Liberals favor? What will happen when McConnell backs down and allows a confirmation vote like he has always backed down on controversial subjects in the past deferring to the Liberals?"

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by kevin kiernan on February 14, 2016 at 11:30am

If anyone argues that Obama must appoint , Here is a point to use in debate.http://www.nytimes.com/live/supreme-court-justice-antonin-scalia-di........THE THURMOND RULE

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Virginia Foulk on February 14, 2016 at 2:13pm

Dang it, the new modem had to be rebooted. Anyway, got it working now.

I have pulled up this NYTimes article(s) and am completely frustrated. Ted Cruz has said that he will use filibuster to stop or hold up any attempt by Obama; and Mitch McConnell says the appointment should not be made until after the New President is elected. I do not believe McConnell will follow through on that. He's failed American citizens before.

Will have to wait and see what happens next - though I still believe Justice Scalia's death should be thoroughly examined and lab tests performed.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kevin kiernan on February 14, 2016 at 2:23pm

Yes I do believe Mitch has Tasted much Bilderberg cool aide.We shall see what Senators will do. I know what my guy Rand will do. He will lead the Charge on this I am sure. Rand will be the one Filibustering.Ted is in campaign mode. There are a few good senators who will fight hard.This will be another thing that will divide us all.The devil is a crafty basturd.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by jack ludwig on February 14, 2016 at 2:31pm

Based on the stories I have read so far on who Obama plans to nominate to replace Scalia, I don't think he has a chance to get it approved by the senate. That will not stop Obama. He believes the holdup of a nomination to the supreme court is a great issue to have before the people right before a national election. Obama believes this can be a pivotal issue to drive the voter turnout up and he is a firm believer that the heavier the turnout the better it is for the democrat candidate. He is betting his entire pot he is right.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Virginia Foulk on February 14, 2016 at 4:04pm

Urgent calls begin for Scalia autopsy

Rush to 'natural causes' conclusion criticized

WASHINGTON – The seemingly quick conclusion that Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died of “natural causes” this weekend is prompting calls for an autopsy and toxicological reports by activists and across social media platforms.

William Gheen, president of the Americans for Legal Immigration political action committee, noted the media’s “rush” to proclaim Scalia’s death in a rented room in a resort in Texas as either “natural causes” or heart attack within hours of the discovery of his body.

“Anytime a head of state, member of Congress, or the most conservative member of the U.S. Supreme Court is found dead, an extensive autopsy and toxicology examination should be both immediate and mandatory,” said Gheen. “The horrid reaction and comments about his death expressed by many liberals online illustrate that Scalia was hated by many people. His death hands the power of the Supreme Court to the modern left for the first time in American history. The court can now vote, even without a replacement of Scalia, to radically change the United States of America. Scalia’s death means the Supreme Court is now very likely to rubber stamp Obama’s unconstitutional amnesty orders, tear down Republican drawn districts in many states including North Carolina, and take deep left turns on abortion, gun rights, or anything the liberals have ever dreamed of. Scalia was a solid vote against Obama’s immigration orders to be decided by April of this year. We do not contend there is a conspiracy, we contend that there should be no doubts, and the way authorities and the media are rushing conclusions will leave major doubts and legitimate concerns about a death that could lead to a radical political transformation of America to the left.”

The body arrived at a Texas funeral home a day after he died while on a hunting trip. Chris Lujan of Sunset Funeral Homes in El Paso said the body of the late justice arrived early Sunday. Scalia had been staying at the Cibolo Creek Ranch in Presidio County, Texas, during a quail hunting trip, said federal officials. He was 79.

Presidio County Judge Cinderella Guevara, who pronounced Scalia dead, said the death certificate will say the cause of death was natural, and that he died of a heart attack. She said no autopsy was necessary.

Guevara said she talked to Scalia’s doctor in Washington, D.C., who told her he had been sick and had been at his office Wednesday and Thursday before going on the hunting trip Friday.

According to Guevara, Scalia told his group Friday at dinner he was not feeling well and went to his room early. He then missed breakfast and lunch Saturday and was found unresponsive in his bed.

Scalia, who was appointed to the high court by former President Ronald Reagan, was the longest-serving justice on the court, having taken his seat on Sept. 26, 1986.

Despite calls from conservatives for his seat to not be filled until a new president was elected, President Obama said Saturday he intends to nominate a replacement before his term ends.

CBS and the Associated Press report today that authorities, including Presidio County Judge Cinderella Guevara, are considering an autopsy for Judge Scalia, although toxicological testing could already be in doubt due to the delay. There is also a report that after arriving at 3:30 a.m. on Sunday, the Sunset Funeral Home embalmed Scalia’s remains, according to Chris Lujuan, a funeral home manager. The embalming process could destroy vital toxicology evidence.

Gheen is calling on activists to call members of Congress and Presidio County Judge Guevara to demand an immediate and comprehensive investigation into what he calls “the suspiciously timed death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia that includes extensive multi-agency law enforcement forensic autopsies and toxicology reports to put these questions to rest or determine if foul play was involved.”

I also just read an article that Obama really doesn't care if they don't allow him to recommend a Justice to fill in - the writer believes that Obummer expects the missing justice spot will encourage more Democrats to vote for the Presidential Democratic candidate. Sure hope that isn't the case. One more frustrating issue.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by kevin kiernan on February 14, 2016 at 4:26pm

The word of liberty spreading will make the evil ones do rash things. I am too much of a skeptic to be comfortable about this rush to findings. There is ways to kill someone with the slightest little bit of certain substances that are very hard to detect.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Virginia Foulk on February 17, 2016 at 9:54pm

Dems Passed A 1960 Resolution To Prevent Supreme Court Appointment Ahead Of Election Julie Brufke 3:52 PM 02/17/2016

Seems that this would be nice but knowing he Liberal/progressives, they'll come up with some reason to ignore. And our GOP will forget their promises, again.

In the wake of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s death, President Barack Obama said he plans on nominating a successor despite Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell×

‘s vow not to fill the seat until the election is over.

While Democrats in the upper chamber – including Sens. Chuck Schumer of New York and Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, both of which called for blocking former President George W. Bush’s nominations – have slammed the GOP for its decision not to consider a nominee until after a new president is elected, Democrats have not always held that stance. The Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution in 1960 preventing a recess appointment, much to the dismay of Republicans.

As first reported by The Washington Post – S.RES. 334, also known as Expressing the Sense of the Senate That The President Should Not Make Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court, Except to Prevent or End a Breakdown in the Administration of the Court’s Business – passed the Senate in a 48-33 vote in an attempt to prevent former President Dwight Eisenhower from filling a seat last-minute.

Article II, Sec. 2 of the Constitution grants the commander in chief the power to appoint a temporary replacement while the upper chamber is not in session. “The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session,” it reads.

With several high-profile cases on the docket, replacing Scalia, a conservative, with a left-leaning judge would likely have a major impact on final rulings and potentially advance Democratic ideologies.

The administration said it will not start the process until the Senate returns.

Eisenhower is the last president to use the recess appointment power to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by M on February 18, 2016 at 6:26am

Virginia,

The problem with an autopsy now is that he's been embalmed and that would negate most if not all evidence of poisoning with agents that would be totally obscured by the embalming fluid. there is also the family's request that an autopsy not be done in view of the official natural causes ruling by the medical examiner who is reported to never have examined the body and gave that ruling over the phone. (Don't know if that report is true or not,can't track down ant positive answers on that from independent sources.)

As to the 1960's resolution, that only pertains to recess appointments not regular appointments when Congress is in session. As I have read the information, and I can most probably be wrong in my assumptions since I am not a Lawyer, the recess appointment to the Supreme Court would only be valid until the end of Obama's term. However the term is for almost a year yet, and much deviltry could be done in that time to destroy the areas of the Constitution the Progressive/Socialists want to negate.

At this point I would counsel every member here to push their State Legislators for a State Petitioned for Article V Convention so the people will have a chance to restore the Constitution back to what the founders intended it to be. I would also counsel the members to ask every one of their friends and relatives to do the same and for those to pass it on. We need a consensus by a majority of the public to take back control of their government if they want to remain free!

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Virginia Foulk on February 18, 2016 at 6:57pm

Like Senator Brown's death (murder?) Vince Foster's Suicide(?), Scalia's death will be forever in our minds and wondering about what happened.

I have noticed several articles and back and forth messages about the Article V Convention here in Wisconsin. Trying to find out more and will do what I can to encourage our Legislature.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Virginia Foulk on February 19, 2016 at 10:04pm

This just makes it more important to push back on Congress and rattle the minds of anyone around to get them out there and vote. And they should also be calling or emailing their representatives,.

One more sign of trouble - IF -the GOP does hold off the Obama choice until 2017, then the new President could make his presence felt. All new Reps and Senators are installed by Jan 3, while Obama has until Jan 20 before he is required to relinquish the position.
So problem one, if the Democrats happen to get a takeover of the Senate, they and Obama could play patty-cake to force his nominee into the Court. Or if the President-elect is either Hillary or Sanders, and (which is usual) the Senate is now owned by the Dems, they could make the choice.
So here's hoping the GOP get a winner, and they do not lose the Senate.