Most notably, Garland has a breakfast meeting with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley.
Advertisement
“We’ve been so crowded we’re going to keep it a little longer”, Diaz said. Senate Republicans vowed beforehand to schedule no hearings or votes on the nomination until after the presidential election.
“This strategy has failed to recognize that I’m no stranger to political pressure and strong-arm tactics”, he said. “I held hearings on even controversial things, whether the leadership liked it or not”. They participated in an event at the Supreme Court building in Washington last week to call on Grassley to “do your job”.
In a Reuters-Ipsos poll that included 900 registered Democrats and 788 registered Republicans conducted April 5-12, 55 percent said the Senate should hold confirmation hearings.
There are a handful of nominees pending who have the support of GOP senators in their states, including two from Pennsylvania backed by Sen.
It apparently does not mean refusing to meet with Garland, as Grassley did today over breakfast (eggs and toast for the judge, oatmeal for the senator). He was approved by the full Senate 72-0.
Majority of the Republicans in the senate have firmly stood by their position against the nomination, causing the Democrats to call them out for obstructionism and undermining their constitutional mandate. The reasoning presumably would be that Garland was preferable to a younger and more liberal nominee likely to come from the new president next year. “We got hammered in the elections, so now we’ve changed our mind'”.
Though Senate Republicans continue to fight against giving the SCOTUS nomination of Merrick Garland a hearing, a few individuals are moving forward and giving the nominee due consideration, with or without the rest of the party.
“They still don’t fully know how that [the recession] happened and whether the system was fixed”, Obama said. “Think of the precedent that sets”.
Grassley, no stranger to controversy during 35 years in the Senate, has become the target of Democrats’ scorn in this Supreme Court drama.
Advertisement
If Garland’s nomination is confirmed, the conservative-liberal balance in the country’s top court would be changed for the first time in the past 25 years. “It’s beneath the dignity of the federal judiciary. I have never seen such concern among Republicans and Democrats for not providing a fair hearings and an opportunity for the U.S. Senators to vote however they choose on this very qualified nominee”, Uhl said. Her office issued a statement that also seemed to close the door on confirming Garland. But only two, Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Illinois, and Sen. Since voters will speak in the November election, he says the Senate should save the nomination for a new President.
