Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Threaded Mode
4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee
03-29-2016, 01:44 PM,
#1
LisaJarratt Offline
Administrator
Posts: 1,271
Threads: 966
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation: 1
4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee
Posts: 1,271
Threads: 966
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation: 1
#1
03-29-2016, 01:44 PM
LAWNEWS
4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee

Criticism of Merrick Garland’s record on the Second Amendment hasn’t stopped four pro-gun Senate Democrats from calling on Republicans to begin the confirmation process for the Supreme Court nominee.

If he is confirmed, conservatives fear that Garland could shift the court to the left for decades and potentially provide the deciding vote to overturn landmark gun rights decisions.
LAWNEWS
4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee

Criticism of Merrick Garland’s record on the Second Amendment hasn’t stopped four pro-gun Senate Democrats from calling on Republicans to begin the confirmation process for the Supreme Court nominee.

If he is confirmed, conservatives fear that Garland could shift the court to the left for decades and potentially provide the deciding vote to overturn landmark gun rights decisions.
Find
Reply
Find
Reply
03-29-2016, 06:17 PM,
#2
British Gunner Offline
Gun Slinger
**
Posts: 320
Threads: 14
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation: 0
RE: 4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee
*
Posts: 320
Threads: 14
Joined: Jun 2015
Reputation: 0
#2
03-29-2016, 06:17 PM
If Garland is Obama's pick, there is no way he is a supporter of 2nd Amendment. The Republicans as majority are supposed to view the President's nominee, but there is nothing that says it has to be done right now. Take it to committee and lose it.
Find
Reply
Find
Reply
03-29-2016, 06:39 PM,
#3
BelieveIn308 Offline
Crack Shot
****
Posts: 2,216
Threads: 124
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 8
RE: 4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee
***
Posts: 2,216
Threads: 124
Joined: Jun 2014
Reputation: 8
#3
03-29-2016, 06:39 PM
If the Republicans hold hearings or vote on this guy they are dead to me. I swear, I will NEVER vote for another one. This guy is a far left loon, like the two women on the court. Lesbians all...
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Col. Jeff Cooper
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." -Col. Jeff Cooper
Find
Reply
Find
Reply
03-29-2016, 07:25 PM,
#4
LisaJarratt Offline
Administrator
Posts: 1,271
Threads: 966
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation: 1
RE: 4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee
Posts: 1,271
Threads: 966
Joined: Nov 2014
Reputation: 1
#4
03-29-2016, 07:25 PM
From everything I hear, he is a mistake. The only thing that will make it worse is if Hillary nominates someone.
Find
Reply
Find
Reply
03-30-2016, 07:31 AM,
#5
Dutz Offline
Crack Shot
****
Posts: 1,393
Threads: 79
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 2
RE: 4 Pro-Gun Democrats Call for Hearing on Supreme Court Nominee
***
Posts: 1,393
Threads: 79
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 2
#5
03-30-2016, 07:31 AM
(03-29-2016, 06:17 PM)British Gunner Wrote: The Republicans as majority are supposed to view the President's nominee, but there is nothing that says it has to be done right now. Take it to committee and lose it.

They did view it.

What they are supposed to do is advise, which they did, and consent or not.

How they advise and present that advise and how they announce the consent is entirely up to them.

Harry Reid changed Senate rules and procedures constantly. The Constitution says nothing about that.

Both sides can blather all they want, but in the end how this happens and how long it takes is really up to McConnell and/or the rules committee.
[Image: CatGun5_zpsxcamfme3.jpg]
(03-29-2016, 06:17 PM)British Gunner Wrote: The Republicans as majority are supposed to view the President's nominee, but there is nothing that says it has to be done right now. Take it to committee and lose it.
They did view it.

What they are supposed to do is advise, which they did, and consent or not.

How they advise and present that advise and how they announce the consent is entirely up to them.

Harry Reid changed Senate rules and procedures constantly. The Constitution says nothing about that.

Both sides can blather all they want, but in the end how this happens and how long it takes is really up to McConnell and/or the rules committee.
[Image: CatGun5_zpsxcamfme3.jpg]
Find
Reply
Find
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)

Contact Us | Red Dot Arms Forum | Return to Top | | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication