Ruth Bader Ginsburg to lie in repose at the Supreme Court this week The public will be allowed to pa

[libertybele]

I saw this coming.... so it is apparent that Trump won't be able to appoint a justice this week out of respect for Ginsburg?  The DEMS can stretch this out for two weeks -- one week she lays in repose -- next week they are going to have a private burial.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg to lie in repose at the Supreme Court this week

A private ceremony will take place in the Great Hall at 9:30 a.m. attended by Justice Ginsburg’s family, close friends, and members of the Court," the Supreme Court said in a press release. "Following the private ceremony inside, Justice Ginsburg will lie in repose under the Portico at the top of the front steps of the Building to allow for public viewing outdoors."

Ginsburg's past law clerks will serve as honorary pallbearers and will greet her casket by lining the front steps of the courthouse. She will then be brought inside the Great Hall, where the current justices will be present and her casket will be placed on the Lincoln Catafalque. That platform, which was used for President Abraham Lincoln's casket, is being loaned to the court by Congress.

The public will be permitted to pay respects to Ginsburg in front of the Supreme Court building on Wednesday between approximately 11 a.m. and 10 p.m., and Thursday from 9 a.m. until 10 p.m.....

A private burial service will take place at Arlington National Cemetery next week......

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-to-lie-in-repose-at-the-supreme-court-this-week

[240B]

Ginsburg died years ago.
She has always been a Leftist corpse.
She is dead man. She's dead!
And Pelosi will go with her.
I am 95 years young. LOL!
You are gone dude. Ginsburg and Pelosi, same thing.

[skeeter]

She's been sitting in repose on the court for the past 6 or 7 years. Why lay her out now?

[libertybele]

She's been sitting in repose on the court for the past 6 or 7 years. Why lay her out now?

Ya, ya I get the point.  Still she is considered a legend and notorious.  There is something to be said for showing respect for the deceased, and this is somewhat of a delicate issue, BUT as we all know, time isn't on Trump's side.  With Nutty Nancy threatening impeachment, he needs to make his nomination this week.

[verga]

Ya, ya I get the point.  Still she is considered a legend and notorious.  There is something to be said for showing respect for the deceased, and this is somewhat of a delicate issue, BUT as we all know, time isn't on Trump's side.  With Nutty Nancy threatening impeachment, he needs to make his nomination this week.

Heais he would be announcing by the end of the week. There is no need for any kind of Confirmation hearing. Lagoa and Barrett have both undergone investigation and passed with flying colors. McConnell can just bring it up for a vote. He just has to make it clear to Romney, Murkowski, Snow, and Collins that the have the right to abstain, but a no vote will result in them not receiving a dime for re-election and they will be primaried out next time around.

[goatprairie]

Heais he would be announcing by the end of the week. There is no need for any kind of Confirmation hearing. Lagoa and Barrett have both undergone investigation and passed with flying colors. McConnell can just bring it up for a vote. He just has to make it clear to Romney, Murkowski, Snow, and Collins that the have the right to abstain, but a no vote will result in them not receiving a dime for re-election and they will be primaried out next time around.

Looks like Romney is alright with going ahead with the vote. I think he might remember Biden's quote about Republicans i.e. Romney putting blacks back in chains.

[Fishrrman]

The announcement is for a successor to the empty seat on the Court.
It's been empty for several days now.

Make the announcement on Saturday.
No matter where Ms. Ginsburg happens to be on that day.

[rustynail]

Ninth Circuit Court Overturns Death Of Ruth Bader Ginsburg

SAN FRANCISCO, CA—In a landmark ruling, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In a close decision, the judges on the court have ruled RBG's death unconstitutional and will block Trump from nominating a replacement.

https://babylonbee.com/news/ninth-circuit-court-overturns-death-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg/?utm_content=bufferc430c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[mountaineer]

I'll defer to our Jewish friends, of course, but how is any of this drawn-out celebration compliant with the laws and practice of the faith? Or didn't Ginsburg and her family care about that?

[RedHead]

Heais he would be announcing by the end of the week. There is no need for any kind of Confirmation hearing. Lagoa and Barrett have both undergone investigation and passed with flying colors. McConnell can just bring it up for a vote. He just has to make it clear to Romney, Murkowski, Snow, and Collins that the have the right to abstain, but a no vote will result in them not receiving a dime for re-election and they will be primaried out next time around.

Virtually every Supreme Court justice served as a judge at a lower Federal court level.  They went through confirmation hearings both times.  A confirmation hearing for Lagoa or Barrett will be needed.

[skeeter]

Virtually every Supreme Court justice served as a judge at a lower Federal court level.  They went through confirmation hearings both times.  A confirmation hearing for Lagoa or Barrett will be needed.

Says Dianne Feinstein. There's no legal requirement for a hearing.

Besides, while I understand the rat fondness for them, these hearings are no longer really hearings.

[mountaineer]

Virtually every Supreme Court justice served as a judge at a lower Federal court level.  They went through confirmation hearings both times.  A confirmation hearing for Lagoa or Barrett will be needed.

That's exactly why hearings are not necessary. Already done.

[Gefn]

I'll defer to our Jewish friends, of course, but how is any of this drawn-out celebration compliant with the laws and practice of the faith? Or didn't Ginsburg and her family care about that?

There are exceptions. Given the fact that she is the first woman to lie in state like this (Sandra O’Connor is still living) would be an exception and she was a Supreme Court Justice, so I’m sure she had both her will and her arrangements done way before her passing.

But I’m not a Rabbinical scholar. Heck, I didn’t even have a Bat Mitzvah. Just an educated guess. I’m surprised she’s not buried next to her husband. They really did love each other. I would want to be buried next to mine if I could and was married,

[skeeter]

There are exceptions. Given the fact that she is the first woman to lie in state like this (Sandra O’Connor is still living) would be an exception and she was a Supreme Court Justice, so I’m sure she had both her will and her arrangements done way before her passing.

But I’m not a Rabbinical scholar. Heck, I didn’t even have a Bat Mitzvah. Just an educated guess. I’m surprised she’s not buried next to her husband. They really did love each other. I would want to be buried next to mine if I could and was married,

BTW the difference between Ginsberg and O'Conner is typical of the difference between leftists and normal people - leftists NEVER voluntarily cede power or position.

[RedHead]

I'll defer to our Jewish friends, of course, but how is any of this drawn-out celebration compliant with the laws and practice of the faith? Or didn't Ginsburg and her family care about that?

Outside of the Orthodox societies, funerals seldom take place within 24 hours.  It's supposed to happen as soon as possible but that's a nebulous term.  Since Ginsburg wasn't an Orthodox Jew this delay in burial isn't surprising. 

[RedHead]

That's exactly why hearings are not necessary. Already done.

And they'll be done again. 

[RedHead]

Says Dianne Feinstein. There's no legal requirement for a hearing.

And under the current rules of the senate, the nomination is sent to the Judiciary Committee for hearings, and from there to the Senate floor for a vote.  So there is no Constitutional requirement for hearings but Senate rules do require one.

[verga]

Virtually every Supreme Court justice served as a judge at a lower Federal court level.  They went through confirmation hearings both times.  A confirmation hearing for Lagoa or Barrett will be needed.

Where does the Constitution say that?

[verga]

And under the current rules of the senate, the nomination is sent to the Judiciary Committee for hearings, and from there to the Senate floor for a vote.  So there is no Constitutional requirement for hearings but Senate rules do require one.

And we have seen the Senate rules changed REPEATEDLY.

[dfwgator]

Has Bergoglio made her a Saint yet?

[mountaineer]

And they'll be done again.

I'm not denying that there probably will be hearings. I said they aren't necessary. Congress does a lot of things that aren't necessary.

[RedHead]

Where does the Constitution say that?

The Constitution says that the President shall "nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law..."  It doesn't specify what steps the Senate shall do in order to advise and consent. 

[RedHead]

And we have seen the Senate rules changed REPEATEDLY.

Until they do change they'll still have hearings.

[verga]

The Constitution says that the President shall "nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law..."  It doesn't specify what steps the Senate shall do in order to advise and consent.

So no where does it say that hearings are required. This means that Cocaine Mitch can, after receiving the official nomination call the vote during the Judiciary Committee Meeting, and after receiving a Majority of Yea's put it up to a Senate vote, or even just take it right to the Senate with no committee meeting. Which is exactly what a number of us have stated.

[verga]

Until they do change they'll still have hearings.

Yeah here's the thing Senate Consideration of Presidential
Nominations: Committee and Floor Procedure
 https://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/74919ab6-b407-451c-b429-702e9ae8dcb1.pdf

No where in there does it say they are required. So it is no so much a "rule" as a formality.