Thanks. "Rules" are so endearing. Right off the bat...
and the final question on every nomination shall be, "Will the Senate advise and consent to this nomination?"
I didn't think they had the option. Now that, I would agree is an un-Constitutional rule. A silly rule...can you imagine the Senate sending a nomination back to the WH saying. Sorry, we decided we don't want to advise and consent on this one.
Not much there to go by as far as understanding the filibuster.
Specifically, I haven't heard any member of the Senate claim that the filibuster can't be used for nominees. They bantor about the Constitution, on the wrong side of the Constitution, etc, ad nauseum. But when it comes right down to it, if the Senate wants to eliminate the filibuster rule, as Frist might say...bring it to an up or down vote. Problem is, he doesn't have enough Republicans willing to give it up.
If they were really serious about the Constitutionality of the rule, all it takes is a single member to challenge it's Constitutionality in the Federal Courts. A few members took the line-item veto into Federal Courts and that was rapidly resolved. No reason why they couldn't do that here...if they believed it was un-Constitutional. My expectation is that the USSC would toss it back at them and politely call them a bunch of idiots.
jttmab |
