Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (86383)	11/15/2004 10:36:47 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793843

Kinsley is misinformed. There is no need to bring this to the court. The Senate can declare the practice unconstitutional itself by a simple majority vote and return to the practice of advise and consent as it has been interpreted for 200 years. There is even a move afoot in the Senate to have Democratic filibusters against Bush's judicial nominees ruled unconstitutional. That would be activism squared. I agree with Kinsley here. I can't think of any constitutional grounds for such a ruling.