Skip to main content

View Diary: Where's the "Judicial Emergency" Scottie? (201 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ugh. (none)
    Yes, and I'm no lawyer or anything like that, but there must be those with literal interpretations and historical interpretations (i.e., the constitution only should be interpreted in historical context).  I'm very much of the opinion that the constitution is a living document and that even the literalists/historians know that they are purposefully denying a legitimate, implied opportunity to disagree.
    •  Possibly I didn't make my point clear, (none)
      I was trying to make a historical interpretation, but not reaching the conclusion it seems like you suppose; what I was saying is that "consent" might not be a response to the president at all, but mean something along the lines of "confer and come to an agreement."  And that agreement might be to reject the nomination.

      I don't know whether that's a correct historical interpretation, but that's what I was trying to say.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site