While Republicans have argued that the next president chosen by the American people should have the opportunity to nominate a judge for the vacancy, the Democrats continue to argue that the people already made their voices known when they reelected Obama. McConnell essentially ignored the question and cited the “Biden rule”, a reference to Vice President Biden in 1992 – then senator and chairman of the Judiciary Committee – when he said the Senate should not fill a Supreme Court vacancy in an election year.
Advertisement
They held a rally in front of the Supreme Court to kick off their “Do Your Job” campaign targeting their recalcitrant Republican colleagues, and leader Harry Reid is promising an all-out offensive.
In a subsequent appearance on Fox News Sunday, McConnell said: “We need to focus on principle … the president nominates, we decide to confirm”. He floated the idea of considering Garland’s nomination in the post-election session because “between him and somebody that a President Clinton might nominate, I think the choice is clear”, he said, referring to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. What’s puzzling is the Republican Senate leaders who are saying this have all said of course they will support Donald Trump if he’s the party nominee. “And I am telling everybody that’s watching this, the senators aren’t going to allow that”, Reid said.
Obama “could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man”, Utah Sen.
The Senate majority leader insisted that the reasoning behind refusing to vote is the same, regardless of timing.
“A lot of people think this nominee ought to be decided by the next president”, McConnell said in an interview on CNN.
“That’s not going to happen”, McConnell said of such an arrangement on “Fox News Sunday“.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has stood firm in saying the Senate would leave the pick to the next president.
“I can’t imagine that a Republican majority Senate, even if it were assumed to be a minority, would want to confirm a judge that would move the court dramatically to the left”, he added. “And I think that Garland is astronomically qualified and should be confirmed”.
And having staked your anti-confirmation case on the argument that the voters should have their say on replacing Justice Antonin Scalia, haven’t you backed yourself into a hard corner if and when it comes to weighing that Clinton nominee? Robert Bork – and having advocated the blockage of any Supreme Court nominee by a Republican president in the run-up to a presidential election.
Advertisement
“There is important work before the Supreme Court, and now the Senate must fulfill its constitutional responsibility to give Judge Garland a fair hearing and a timely vote”, Congressman Cleaver concluded. It didn’t matter if John Marshall came back to life and the president put him forward for the Senate’s advice and consent, the GOP lawmakers were determined to turn a deaf ear.
