Hell, No.  

     Is it a coincidence that Justice Scalia ruled against Obama's climate power grab just days ago, and now he dies at a ranch in rural west Texas? 

I'm feeling rather ill that this is what the media is dwelling on instead of being sad for his family.

let's hope not.... 

NO!

God help us is right.  No. NO. Hell No.

I agree 100% with Fred Griffin , HELL NO! However there will be one big rush to get the next flaming liberal on the court by the left before they are out of power.

no sir, not at all

I think the answer to that would depend on whether you lean left or right.  This topic will likely be among the first brought up by the debate moderators tonight.

Will,

This is a question that for me it is best left unanswered.  A

Doesn't matter what I think, it won't happen. The republicans won't allow Obama to appoint one.

I think he will not miss this opportunity to put an anti-gunner in the supreme court, in a position previously held by a pro-gunner.

Absolutely NO ! If we get a justice like the last two appointments, BHO will have succeeded in fundamentally transforming this nation into a banana republic

My heart sank at the thought of that when I heard the news.

Perhaps President Obama will guarantee  his legacy by placating the Republicans and leaving the position vacant in 2016 only to pardon President Elect Hillary Clinton on his last day of office.  

Then President Clinton can nominate former President Obama for that vacant seat on the Supreme Court on her first day in office and the Obama Legacy can live on for the next 35 years through the Supreme Court.

NO

I am sure that there are many who would like to see it delayed.

I'm thinking they will try to, but don't think it will go through.  My answer is 'no' Will Hamm! 

Why would we wait, the supreme court still has to function.

Yes, one should be selected and confirmed.  But, it won't happen.

It is the duty of the president to nominate one.

I agree,  No!

I think that a new Supreme Court Justice should be named and confirmed as soon as possible.  It's irresponsible to delay it for over a year.  

I think they should, but I'm sure the conservative Republicans will again delay the process and do nothing, as they have done for the last 8 years.

I'm not a Dem. or Rep, I am just looking for the best person available, always, and I think the Congress, with their 7-9% approval rating has hurt this country more than anyone, due to the fact that NOTHING gets done.

What the Republicans will find out, is by waiting, then loosing the election, a more liberal president might be worse for those conservatives.

"Since the 15th century, Lady Justice has often been depicted wearing a blindfold. The blindfold represents objectivity, in that justice is or should be meted out objectively, without fear or favour, regardless of money, wealth, power, or identity; blind justice and impartiality. The earliest Roman coins depicted Justitia with the sword in one hand and the scale in the other, but with her eyes uncovered.^[4] Justitia was only commonly represented as "blind" since about the end of the 15th century. "

What a shame that none of the above matters. Justices are either conservative or liberal and motivated entirely by their political allegiances.

Our system is simply broken--I suppose it always has been..

I often wonder just why so many in the USA think a european system is better than what we have and attempt to drag the rest of us with them.  If I wanted to live in Europe - I could and would.  I don't.

Wait for the new president.

Good morning Will. One will get nominated, hopefully not approved before the election.

It won't get approved.

 Good morning Will Hamm . You know, of course, Obama is going to want to leave his legacy. The answer is no.

I am thinking they will try to get someone in as quick as possible.  They would take an opportunity to fill it with a candidate of their choosing.

I think it will be a long draw out process and could take months to get a consensus. The President has the right to make the appointment and the Congress has the right to vet it.

Ronald Reagan named a Supreme Court Justice in his final year and the Democratic-majority Senate voted and approved his (conservative) nominee. Back when our government was functional this would not even be a question but those days are long gone. 

We will see....I did read a legal brief today and it said that the President could suggest someone that he just put into a lesser legal role two years ago that the Republicans approved 90-0. How could they then object to someone that they supported so much?!

I suspect Congress will stall any confirmation. So why waste taxpayers' dollars with the effort?

It's not up to me to decide.  I believe that person has made the decision.  

Agree with Barbara Todaro, let's hope not!

No, Obama will want to get it filled with his nominee as quickly as possible.  But will they be approved in time?  Who knows.

No.  Also I think there should be term limits for the Supreme Court members.

Definately not. 

I don't think so and I don't think congress will confirm any one put forward  either...

It will be much to our dismay but he will try to appoint one to leave his imprint on the country for far longer than we would like!

If we appoint another anything goes and is allowed justice...we are doomed

They should what is best for the country .

That depends on the Capitol Hill........

The President could name himself !

Just one more example of our disfunctional government.