Skip to main content

View Diary: Filibuster fireworks likely for July (65 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Interesting. I now find myself wondering about a (0+ / 0-)

    sort of legislative privilege, and I'm having to think back to my bar exam days.  Is there a line where a federal court would eventually step in?  I think as long as majority vote were preserved, that would never happen, but to create a farcical fact pattern, let's say that a future Senate leader tried to pass bills with a minority - somehow managed to create a Senate rule that a bill was deemed passed once it hit 40 votes, even if 60 Senators opposed it.  Is there a line?

    It's all academic, I don't think there are 51 Senators in support of filibuster reform to start with, but we could all learn a lot about legislative prerogatives if this does happen.

    "The first drawback of anger is that it destroys your inner peace; the second is that it distorts your view of reality. If you come to understand that anger is really unhelpful, you can begin to distance yourself from anger." - The Dalai Lama

    by auron renouille on Wed May 22, 2013 at 01:36:54 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The Constitution explicitly says each house (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      auron renouille

      has power over its own rules.  So I'm guessing there would be extremely wide deference on rules questions as long as no one ends up in jail without trial.

      The point is that if the filibuster does go down on certain legislative matters there's no possible relief.  But in the Senate, unanimous consent could be withdrawn for quite some time by the aggrieved party.  So the Senate may have to start voting and debating the naming of Post Offices.

      I'll always be...King of Bain...I'll always be...King of Bain

      by AZphilosopher on Wed May 22, 2013 at 04:48:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site