The fight to nominate Scalia's replacement

[khagler]

robkelk wrote:

---

First:
The family of Justice Scalia has my sympathies in their time of loss.

Second:
Refresh my memory, please: Does the President get to name an appointee all on his own, or does the appointment need to be confirmed by Congress?

If it's the latter, what's to keep Congress from dragging their heels for a year and then saying the proposed appointee is unacceptable? (Other than the weight of public opinion, that is.)

The appointment has to be confirmed by the Senate, not the entire Congress.Nothing keeps the Senate from dragging their feet, and I expect both parties to eagerly do just that in order to use the appointment for propaganda purposes leading up to the next big game. By keeping the seat empty, they can use "vote for us or The Others will get to nominate Scalia's replacement and life as we know it will end in a fiery apocalypse" to get people who don't care which horrible dirtbag candidate wins. Not only that, but establishment candidates can use it in the playoffs before the big game to say things like "you have to support Clinton/Rubio/Kasich because Sanders/Trump/Cruz can't win the general election, and if you don't support them you're giving the Supreme Court seat to The Others."