Ted Cruz's Supreme Court remark draws White House criticism
National News
Sen. Ted Cruz's suggestion of an indefinite Supreme Court vacancy under a President Hillary Clinton raises questions about the credibility and integrity of Republicans who have said the next president should get to the choose who fills the vacancy, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said Thursday.
Earnest was asked during Thursday's White House press briefing about the Texas Republican's statement that there is a long historical precedent for a Supreme Court operating with fewer justices.
Earnest replied that the notion of opposing any nomination put forward by a Democratic president would be inconsistent with longstanding Senate tradition. He said historically that the Senate has evaluated candidates based on their merits.
"Republicans this year have deviated from that tradition by refusing to even consider Chief Judge Merrick Garland to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court," Earnest said.
Cruz's comment also seemingly contradicts an earlier position he took during the GOP primary when he told CNN, "I think 2016 should be a referendum on the Supreme Court."
Sen. John McCain said earlier this month that Republicans would unite against any Supreme Court nominee that Clinton puts forward if she becomes president, though an aide later said that McCain would examine the record of anyone nominated for the high court and vote for or against that person based on their qualifications.
Obama nominated Garland in March to fill the vacancy left by the death of former Justice Antonin Scalia, but Senate Republicans, led by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, declined to hold hearings as they insisted the voters choosing the next president would have the final say on the vacancy.
Related listings
-
Rights group criticizes Polish law of weakening top court
National News 10/14/2016An international human rights body on Friday criticized recently enacted legislation in Poland regulating the nation's top legislative court, saying the law "gives excessive power to parliament and the executive over the judiciary." The Venice Commis...
-
Iraq's federal court rules against prime minister's reforms
National News 10/12/2016Iraq's federal court ruled on Monday that Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi's move to abolish the largely ceremonial posts of the country's vice president and deputy prime minister is unconstitutional. Under Iraq's constitution, abolishing the posts wou...
-
Suspected people smuggler charged in Australian court
National News 10/01/2016An Iranian citizen extradited from Indonesia was charged in a Sydney court on Thursday with attempting to smuggle 73 asylum seekers by boat to Australia. Mohammad Naghi Karimi Azar, 56, on Wednesday became the eighth suspected people smuggler to be e...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.