President Barack Obama is challenging Republicans to live up to their avowed adherence for the Constitution and agree to vote on his nominee to replace the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Advertisement
“This will be a test, one more test of whether or not norms, rules, basic fair play can function at all in Washington these days”, he said.
“The Constitution is pretty clear about what is supposed to happen now”, Obama said during his first press conference since Scalia’s passing over the weekend.
Think back 30 years ago when the now-deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia was confirmed by the Senate. Soon after, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced his intention to block any replacement until a new president takes office in 2017.
What I said in the speech given in 2007 is simple: Democrats, after a hearing, should entertain voting no if the nominee is out of the mainstream and tries to cover that fact up. If the GOP truly stands for that principle, it will move to expeditiously confirm a qualified nominee to the Supreme Court.
The Republicans’ recommended solution is “irresponsible and it’s unprecedented”, Sen. Pat Leahy, the ranking Democrat Senate Judiciary Committee, said Tuesday.
Americans are exhausted of their elected leaders succumbing to petty and partisan whims of a small, vocal minority.
The dispute reflects years of escalating partisan hostilities over judicial nominations, as well as the unusual timing.
As for the argument we shouldn’t consider in a president’s final year in office, let me remind shameful Republicans that a Democratic controlled Senate in 1988 not only took up Anthony Kennedy’s Supreme Court nomination. And it’s not too early for other members of the Senate who don’t share Obama’s politics to support the decision to nominate candidates for the Supreme Court Justice seat.
The court is expected to hear an abortion case on whether states can require abortion facilities to meet the same building standards as outpatient surgical centers.
The president said he understood the high stakes for Republican senators under pressure to vote against his pick for the lifetime appointment, who conceivably would be the deciding vote in cases where the court is split.
Advertisement
The court would be unable to issue rulings on any issue in which the justices split 4-4.
