Quote:
|
Originally Posted by joeydb
No one disputes that both chambers can and do define parliamentary rules. The question is whether the "voting for a rule to declare an unvoted piece of legislation as passed" violates the intent of the Constitution. That is certainly a legitimate question for the Supreme Court, and given the contentious and sweeping nature of the bill, I expect to see that angle used.
The best bet of those who support the bill, even you Riot, is that the bill pass on a straight up and down vote as we've been passing legislation for 231 years, and then the President can sign it. Anything other than that will not get support or even compliance from those of us opposed.
|
no. it's not.
The judicial branch has no business dictating how the legislative branch does it's buisness. it would be a sweeping change to the balance of power between the branches of government if the supreme court inserted itself in the legislative process as you suggest.
and it's not going to happen. i don't know what blog you're reading that suggests this is a possibility but it simply isn't.
i'm not into political astrology which is why i stay away from guessing what happens on the vote. but this isn't astrology. you have as much chance of this happening as the birthers do of removing obama because he's not a natural born citizen.