Marcus was confirmed 50-46, so at least based on the final vote, it appears he does not fit your criteria of being uncontroversial.
He was referred out of committee and thus placed on the Senate Calendar on January 18 along with 29 other executive nominations.
Of those 30, 8 were confirmed with a voice vote within one month by a voice vote.
Only one has been confirmed with more than 50 votes.
Of the remaining 21, which ones are uncontroversial and what is your basis for concluding such?
I assume either would drop a bowl to add this one. No SEC teams get jazzed for a trip to Shreveport or Birmingham so I assume they'd happily drop either for Vegas.
So you started a thread for the purpose of accusing Democrats of obstructing Trump's executive nominees but you don't actually have any knowledge of what nominees have been obstructed or how?
For which uncontroversial nominees have Dems demanded hearings and roll call votes and/or filibustered? What is your test for whether a nominee is uncontroversial?
I didn't ask you how legislative bodies work. I'm quite familiar with the process, House rules, and parliamentary procedure.
I asked you specifically which nominations are being obstructed by Democrats and in what manner.
We could follow the same immigration policy we did for the first century of our existence and which led to the United States being the greatest country in the world.
This lib has been criticizing Senate obstruction of judicial nominations since Bush was President. Just because you’re a hypocritical piece of shit doesn’t mean everyone else is. I guess trust funds can’t buy principles.
The catcher was still between third and home maybe 15-25 feet down the base line so I don’t think Bryant could have gotten past him before the ball was thrown to him.
A single-income household with the earner making $127k per year is earning more than about 85% of American households annually. A married couple both maxing out of the SS tax are earning more than 97% of American households annually.
I’m not opposed to that balancing test but it’s contrary to existing free exercise law under Employment Division v. Smith. I also think it’s different, not legally but morally, if it’s a baker in Denver, where hundreds of competitors are happy to serve you rather than say in Lufkin, where you could conceivably be blackballed by the entire town.